Changing explanatory frameworks in the U.S. government’s attempt to define research misconduct

Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):137-154 (1999)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Nearly two decades of debate have not settled the definition of research misconduct. The literature provides four explanatory frameworks for misconduct. The paper examines these frameworks and maps them onto efforts by the U.S. Public Health Service to define research misconduct and subsequent responses to these efforts by the scientific community. The changing frameworks suggest that closure will not be achieved without an authoritative effort, which may occur through the Research Integrity Panel’s recent attempt to create a government-wide definition.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 84,179

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Misconduct in science and the German law.Stefanic Stegemann-Bochl - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):57-62.
Scientific misconduct: Present problems and future trends.Barbara Mishkin - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):283-292.
The legacy of the Hwang case: Research misconduct in biosciences.Péter Kakuk - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (4):545-562.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
29 (#432,315)

6 months
1 (#510,113)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile