Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Commentary on “changing explanatory frameworks in the U.S. government’s attempts to define research misconduct” (D.H. Guston)

  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Guston, D.H. (1999) Changing Explanatory Framework in the U.S. Government’s Attempts to Define Research Misconduct, Science and Engineering Ethics 5:xx-xx.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. See, for example, quotation of Dr. Jeffrey Rosen’s in: Marshall, E. (1999) Investigations on Trial in a Texas Court, Science 283: 914.

    Google Scholar 

  3. See, for example, Harvard Faculty of Medicine (1989) Principles and Procedures for Dealing with Allegations of Faculty Misconduct, Faculty Policies on Integrity in Science, Website: 〈http://www.hms.harvard.edu/integrity/〉.

  4. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. (1989) Responsibilities of Awardee and Applicant Institutions for Dealing with and Reporting Possible Misconduct in Science, 42 C.F.R. part 50, Subpart A.

  5. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Department Appeals Board, Research Adjudications Panel (February 5, 1999) Decision in Subject: Kimon J. Angelides, Ph.D., Docket N. A-97-98, Decision No. 1677: 1–143, Website 〈http://hhs.gov/progorg/dab/1677.html〉.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Office for Research Issues, Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck Street, 02115, Boston, MA, USA

    Margaret Dale

Authors
  1. Margaret Dale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dale, M. Commentary on “changing explanatory frameworks in the U.S. government’s attempts to define research misconduct” (D.H. Guston). SCI ENG ETHICS 5, 158–160 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-999-0004-y

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-999-0004-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation