Journal of Academic Ethics 20 (1):51-65 (2022)
Abstract |
In the past two decades, individual explanations of scientific misconduct have increasingly given way to systemic explanations. Where did this interest in systemic factors come from? Given that research ethicists often present their interventions as responses to scientific misconduct, this article tests the hypothesis that these systemic explanations were triggered by high-visibility cases of scientific norm violation. It does so by examining why Dutch scientists in 2011 explained Diederik Stapel’s grand-scale data fabrication largely in systemic terms, whereas only fifteen years earlier, in the René Diekstra affair, such explanations had been close to absent. Drawing on a wealth of historical sources, the article suggests that cases like Stapel’s as such do not explain why early 21st-century commentators exchanged individual explanations for systemic ones. Only against the background of an existing discourse of criticism of the science system, developed in the 1990s and 2000s in response to rapidly increasing competition for research funding, could the Stapel affair achieve notoriety as an example of how systemic factors provoke bad conduct.
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
ISBN(s) | |
DOI | 10.1007/s10805-020-09389-8 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
The Oxford Textbook of Clinical Research Ethics.Ezekiel J. Emanuel (ed.) - 2008 - Oxford University Press.
What Research Institutions Can Do to Foster Research Integrity.Lex Bouter - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (4):2363-2369.
The Perverse Effects of Competition on Scientists' Work and Relationships.Melissa S. Anderson, Emily A. Ronning, Raymond De Vries & Brian C. Martinson - 2007 - Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (4):437-461.
Ranking Major and Minor Research Misbehaviors: Results From a Survey Among Participants of Four World Conferences on Research Integrity.Gerben ter Riet, Brian C. Martinson, Nils Axelsen, Joeri Tijdink & Lex M. Bouter - 2016 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 1 (1).
Exploring Scientific Misconduct: Isolated Individuals, Impure Institutions, or an Inevitable Idiom of Modern Science? [REVIEW]Benjamin K. Sovacool - 2008 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 5 (4):271-282.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Misconduct in Science and the German Law.Stefanic Stegemann-Bochl - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):57-62.
Scientific Integrity in Brazil.Liliane Lins & Fernando Martins Carvalho - 2014 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 11 (3):283-287.
Tales of Research Misconduct: A Lacanian Diagnostics of Integrity Challenges in Science Novels.Hub Zwart - 2017 - Springer.
Beyond Conflict of Interest: The Responsible Conduct of Research.Lawrence J. Rhoades - 2002 - Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (3):459-468.
Scientific Misconduct and Research Ethics in Economics.Altug Yalcintas & Wible James R. - 2016 - Review of Social Economy 74 (1):1-6.
Research Misconduct in the Croatian Scientific Community: A Survey Assessing the Forms and Characteristics of Research Misconduct.Vanja Pupovac, Snježana Prijić-Samaržija & Mladen Petrovečki - 2017 - Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (1):165-181.
Scientific Misconduct: Present Problems and Future Trends.Barbara Mishkin - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):283-292.
Emergence and Its Place in Nature: A Case Study of Biochemical Networks.F. C. Boogerd, F. J. Bruggeman, Robert C. Richardson, Achim Stephan & H. Westerhoff - 2005 - Synthese 145 (1):131 - 164.
Emergence and its Place in Nature: A Case Study of Biochemical Networks.Fred C. Boogerd, Frank J. Bruggeman, Robert C. Richardson, Achim Stephan & Hans V. Westerhoff - 2005 - Synthese 145 (1):131-164.
Scientific Misconduct in Japan: The Present Paucity of Oversight Policy.Brian Taylor Slingsby, Satoshi Kodama & Akira Akabayashi - 2006 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 15 (3):294-297.
Evolving Research Misconduct Policies and Their Significance for Physical Scientists.James J. Dooley & Helen M. Kerch - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):109-121.
The Objects of Acceptance: Competing Scientific Explanations.Ronald C. Hopson - 1972 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1972:349 - 363.
Falsification of Credentials in the Research Setting; Scientific Misconduct?Debra M. Parrish - 1996 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 24 (3):260-266.
Scientific Misconduct and Findings Against Graduate and Medical Students.Debra M. Parrish - 2004 - Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (3):483-491.
Falsification of Credentials in the Research Setting; Scientific Misconduct?Debra M. Parrish - 1996 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 24 (3):260-266.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2021-01-12
Total views
15 ( #697,514 of 2,505,175 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #209,579 of 2,505,175 )
2021-01-12
Total views
15 ( #697,514 of 2,505,175 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #209,579 of 2,505,175 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads