Science and Engineering Ethics 4 (1):51-64 (1998)
AbstractFiling charges of scientific misconduct can be a risky and dangerous endeavor. This article presents rules of conduct to follow when considering whether to report perceived misconduct, and a set of step-by-step procedures for responsible whistleblowing that describe how to do so once the decision to report misconduct has been made. This advice is framed within the university setting, and may not apply fully in industrial settings.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
No references found.
Citations of this work
Development of Role-Play Scenarios for Teaching Responsible Conduct of Research.Bradley J. Brummel, C. K. Gunsalus, Kerri L. Anderson & Michael C. Loui - 2010 - Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (3):573-589.
Preventing the Need for Whistleblowing: Practical Advice for University Administrators. [REVIEW]C. K. Gunsalus - 1998 - Science and Engineering Ethics 4 (1):75-94.
The Fallout: What Happens to Whistleblowers and Those Accused but Exonerated of Scientific Misconduct?James S. Lubalin & Jennifer L. Matheson - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):229-250.
Similar books and articles
What Can Managers Do About Unethical Management?Richard P. Nielsen - 1987 - Journal of Business Ethics 6 (4):309 - 320.
Value Orientations as Determinants of Preference for External and Anonymous Whistleblowing.Dilek Zamantili Nayir & Christian Herzig - 2012 - Journal of Business Ethics 107 (2):197-213.
The Implications of an Organization's Structure on Whistleblowing.Granville King - 1999 - Journal of Business Ethics 20 (4):315-326.
Whistleblowing and Scientific Misconduct: Renewing Legal and Virtue Ethics Foundations.Thomas Alured Faunce - unknown