Results for 'scientific misconduct'

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  10
    Scientific Misconduct and Research Ethics in Economics.Altug Yalcintas & Wible James R. - 2016 - Review of Social Economy 74 (1):1-6.
    Considered here are matters relating to the responsible conduct of research in economics and science in the United States for the last forty years. In science there was a “late 20th century wave” of scientific misconduct and then a “millennial wave”. For economics in the former era, episodes of honest error and replication failure occurred. Recently plagiarism and data manipulation have been reported. Overall few economists seem to fabricate data, but falsification of data, replication failure, and plagiarism occur. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  60
    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.
    This paper identifies three distinct narratives concerning scientific misconduct: a narrative of “individual impurity” promoted by those wishing to see science self-regulated; a narrative of “institutional impropriety” promoted by those seeking greater external control of science; and a narrative of “structural crisis” among those critiquing the entire process of research itself. The paper begins by assessing contemporary definitions and estimates of scientific misconduct. It emphasizes disagreements over such definitions and estimates as a way to tease out (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  3.  99
    Scientific Misconduct and Science Ethics: A Case Study Based Approach.Luca Consoli - 2006 - Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (3):533-541.
    The Schön misconduct case has been widely publicized in the media and has sparked intense discussions within and outside the scientific community about general issues of science ethics. This paper analyses the Report of the official Committee charged with the investigation in order to show that what at first seems to be a quite uncontroversial case, turns out to be an accumulation of many interesting and non-trivial questions (of both ethical and philosophical interest). In particular, the paper intends (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  4.  41
    Scientific Misconduct: Three Forms That Directly Harm Others as the Modus Operandi of Mill’s Tyranny of the Prevailing Opinion.Marcoen J. T. F. Cabbolet - 2014 - Science and Engineering Ethics 20 (1):41-54.
    Scientific misconduct is usually assumed to be self-serving. This paper, however, proposes to distinguish between two types of scientific misconduct: ‘type one scientific misconduct’ is self-serving and leads to falsely positive conclusions about one’s own work, while ‘type two scientific misconduct’ is other-harming and leads to falsely negative conclusions about someone else’s work. The focus is then on the latter type, and three known issues are identified as specific forms of such (...) misconduct: biased quality assessment, smear, and officially condoning scientific misconduct. These concern the improper ways how challenges of the prevailing opinion are thwarted in the modern world. The central issue is pseudoskepticism: uttering negative conclusions about someone else’s work that are downright false. It is argued that this may be an emotional response, rather than a calculated strategic action. Recommendations for educative and punitive measures are given to prevent and to deal with these three forms of scientific misconduct. (shrink)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5.  14
    Scientific Misconduct in India: Causes and Perpetuation.Pratap Patnaik - 2016 - Science and Engineering Ethics 22 (4):1245-1249.
    Along with economic strength, space technology and software expertise, India is also a leading nation in fraudulent scientific research. The problem is worsened by vested interests working in concert for their own benefits. These self-promoting cartels, together with biased evaluation methods and weak penal systems, combine to perpetuate scientific misconduct. Some of these issues are discussed in this commentary, with supporting examples and possible solutions.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  6.  31
    Scientific Misconduct From the Perspective of Research Coordinators: A National Survey.E. R. Pryor, B. Habermann & M. E. Broome - 2007 - Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (6):365-369.
    Objective: To report results from a national survey of coordinators and managers of clinical research studies in the US on their perceptions of and experiences with scientific misconduct.Methods: Data were collected using the Scientific Misconduct Questionnaire-Revised. Eligible responses were received from 1645 of 5302 surveys sent to members of the Association of Clinical Research Professionals and to subscribers of Research Practitioner, published by the Center for Clinical Research Practice, between February 2004 and January 2005.Findings: Overall, the (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  7.  44
    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.
    Scientific misconduct can jeopardize scientific progress and destroy the credibility and reputation of academic institutions and their faculty and students; ultimately it can compromise scientific integrity and result in a loss of confidence for the entire scientific community. Only recently in Japan has scientific misconduct become a central public topic. This increased attention to the topic, in turn, has highlighted a paucity of ethical standards within the Japanese scientific community and a lack (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  8.  28
    Scientific Misconduct and Findings Against Graduate and Medical Students.Debra M. Parrish - 2004 - Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (3):483-491.
    Allegations of scientific misconduct against graduate students appear to have unique attributes in the detection, investigation, processes used and sanctions imposed vis-à-vis other populations against which misconduct is alleged and found. An examination of the cases closed by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Research Integrity and the National Science Foundation reveals that most of the allegations made against graduate and medical students are for falsification and fabrication. Further, additional processes are used in these (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  9.  10
    Scientific Misconduct and Research Integrity: Federal Definitions and Approaches.Chris B. Pascal - 1999 - Professional Ethics, a Multidisciplinary Journal 7 (1):9-32.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10.  60
    Criminalization of Scientific Misconduct.William Bülow & Gert Helgesson - 2019 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 22 (2):245-252.
    This paper discusses the criminalization of scientific misconduct, as discussed and defended in the bioethics literature. In doing so it argues against the claim that fabrication, falsification and plagiarism (FFP) together identify the most serious forms of misconduct, which hence ought to be criminalized, whereas other forms of misconduct should not. Drawing the line strictly at FFP is problematic both in terms of what is included and what is excluded. It is also argued that the criminalization (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  11.  23
    Scientific Misconduct: Present Problems and Future Trends.Barbara Mishkin - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):283-292.
    Substantial progress in handling scientific misconduct cases has been made since the first cases were investigated by the NIH Office of Scientific Integrity in 1989. The successor Office of Research Integrity (ORI) has simultaneously reduced the backlog of cases and increased the professionalism with which they are handled. However, a spate of lawsuits against universities, particularly those brought under the federal False Claims Act, threatens to undermine the ORI by encouraging use of the courts as an alternate (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  12.  16
    Scientific Misconduct: A Perspective From India.Husain Sabir, Subhash Kumbhare, Amit Parate, Rajesh Kumar & Suroopa Das - 2015 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 18 (2):177-184.
    Misconduct in medical science research is an unfortunate reality. Science, for the most part, operates on the basis of trust. Researchers are expected to carry out their work and report their findings honestly. But, sadly, that is not how science always gets done. Reports keep surfacing from various countries about work being plagiarised, results which were doctored and data fabricated. Scientific misconduct is scourge afflicting the field of science, unfortunately with little impact in developing countries like India (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  13.  38
    Publicizing Scientific Misconduct and its Consequences.Stephanie J. Bird - 2004 - Science and Engineering Ethics 10 (3):435-436.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  14.  20
    Responsibility for Scientific Misconduct in Collaborative Papers.Gert Helgesson & Stefan Eriksson - 2018 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 21 (3):423-430.
    This paper concerns the responsibility of co-authors in cases of scientific misconduct. Arguments in research integrity guidelines and in the bioethics literature concerning authorship responsibilities are discussed. It is argued that it is unreasonable to claim that for every case where a research paper is found to be fraudulent, each author is morally responsible for all aspects of that paper, or that one particular author has such a responsibility. It is further argued that it is more constructive to (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  15.  11
    Scientific Misconduct: The Lessons of Time: Commentary on “The History and Future of the Office of Research Integrity: Scientific Conduct and Beyond”.Daryl E. Chubin - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):199-202.
    Pascal’s paper indicates how far we have come. Now as then, however, there is a need to reflect from outside the cocoon of our agencies, institutions, and disciplines to behold the enterprise that shapes both our behavior and our interpretations of it. For the boundary separating propriety from impropriety continues to move. Just as science, and the knowledge it begets, continues to evolve, so must our collective standards. The lessons of time include this: ORI or biomedical research is no island; (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  4
    Scientific Misconduct: The Lessons of Time: Commentary on “The History and Future of the Office of Research Integrity: Scientific Conduct and Beyond”.Daryl E. Chubin - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):199-202.
    Pascal’s paper indicates how far we have come. Now as then, however, there is a need to reflect from outside the cocoon of our agencies, institutions, and disciplines to behold the enterprise that shapes both our behavior and our interpretations of it. For the boundary separating propriety from impropriety continues to move. Just as science, and the knowledge it begets, continues to evolve, so must our collective standards. The lessons of time include this: ORI or biomedical research is no island; (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17.  59
    Responding to Allegations of Scientific Misconduct: The Procedure at the French National Medical and Health Research Institute.Jean-Philippe Breittmayer, Martine Bungener, Hugues De The, Evelyne Eschwege, Michel Fougereau, Gilles Guedj, Claude Kordon, Olivier Philippe, Maric-Catherine Postel-Vinay & Laurence Schaffar-Esterle - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):41-48.
    Institutions in France are not yet well prepared to respond to allegations of scientific misconduct. Following a serious allegation in late 1997. INSERM,* the primary organization for medical and health-related research in France, began to reflect on this subject, aided by scientists and jurists. The conclusions have resulted in establishing a procedure to be followed in cases of alleged misconduct, and also in reinforcing the application of good laboratory practices within each laboratory. Guidelines for authorship practices and (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18.  2
    Scientific Misconduct and Fraud. [REVIEW]Marcel Herbst - 2021 - The European Legacy 27 (1):74-79.
    Science is said to seek the truth, at least within the bounds that societies or individuals see as explorable from an ethical point of view. Truth may be elusive or even unattainable, tainted by pa...
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19.  36
    Scientific Misconduct: An International Perspective.Lawrence Rhoades & A. Gorski - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):5-10.
    The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the policies of the Office of Research Integrity, U.S.Department of Health, or any other Federal agency.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  20.  16
    Prevalence of Scientific Misconduct Among a Group of Researchers in Nigeria.Patrick Okonta & Theresa Rossouw - 2013 - Developing World Bioethics 13 (3):149-157.
    Background There is a dearth of information on the prevalence of scientific misconduct from Nigeria. Objectives This study aimed at determining the prevalence of scientific misconduct in a group of researchers in Nigeria. Factors associated with the prevalence were ascertained. Method A descriptive study of researchers who attended a scientific conference in 2010 was conducted using the adapted Scientific Misconduct Questionnaire-Revised (SMQ-R). Results Ninety-one researchers (68.9%) admitted having committed at least one of the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  21.  15
    World Map of Scientific Misconduct.Behzad Ataie-Ashtiani - 2018 - Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (5):1653-1656.
    A comparative world map of scientific misconduct reveals that countries with the most rapid growth in scientific publications also have the highest retraction rate. To avoid polluting the scientific record further, these nations must urgently commit to enforcing research integrity among their academic communities.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  22.  8
    Scientific Misconduct: Ill‐Defined, Redefined.Joseph Palca - 1996 - Hastings Center Report 26 (5):4-4.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  23.  36
    Scientific Misconduct: Ongoing Developments.Raymond Spier & Stephanie J. Bird - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):3-4.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  24.  14
    A Review of the Scientific Misconduct Inquiry Process, Ankara Chamber of Medicine, Turkey. [REVIEW]Banu Gökçay & Berna Arda - 2017 - Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (4):1097-1112.
    The aim of this study is to review the inquiry process used in scientific misconduct cases in the Ankara Chamber of Medicine between the years 1998 and 2012. The violations of the “Disciplinary Regulations of the Turkish Medical Association” have been examined by keeping the names of the people, institutions, associations and journals secret. In total, 31 files have been studied and 11 of these files have been identified as related to scientific misconduct. The methods of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  25.  16
    Systemic Explanations of Scientific Misconduct: Provoked by Spectacular Cases of Norm Violation?Pieter Huistra & Herman Paul - 2022 - Journal of Academic Ethics 20 (1):51-65.
    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 (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26.  6
    Legal Protections for the Scientific Misconduct Whistleblower.Peter Poon - 1995 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 23 (1):88-95.
    Even with thirty years of academic experience under his belt, nothing could have prepared the medical school department chairman for the unexpected and protracted course of events that would follow his allegations of scientific misconduct against an associate professor in his department. In this actual case of scientific misconduct whistleblowing, the university allowed the accused professor to resign, but the chairman persisted in seeking a full investigation of the matter. Under the direction of the Office of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  27.  12
    Commentary on "Scientific Misconduct: Present Problems and Future Trends" (B. Mishkin).Debra M. Parrish - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):299-301.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28.  9
    Legal Protections for the Scientific Misconduct Whistleblower.Peter Poon - 1995 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 23 (1):88-95.
    Even with thirty years of academic experience under his belt, nothing could have prepared the medical school department chairman for the unexpected and protracted course of events that would follow his allegations of scientific misconduct against an associate professor in his department. In this actual case of scientific misconduct whistleblowing, the university allowed the accused professor to resign, but the chairman persisted in seeking a full investigation of the matter. Under the direction of the Office of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  29.  37
    The Swedish Research Council’s Definition of ‘Scientific Misconduct’: A Critique.Håkan Salwén - 2015 - Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (1):115-126.
    There is no consensus over the proper definition of ‘scientific misconduct.’ There are differences in opinion not only between countries but also between research institutions in the same country. This is unfortunate. Without a widely accepted definition it is difficult for scientists to adjust to new research milieux. This might hamper scientific innovation and make cooperation difficult. Furthermore, due to the potentially damaging consequences it is important to combat misconduct. But how frequent is it and what (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  30.  6
    Historicizing the Crisis of Scientific Misconduct in Indian Science.Mahendra Shahare & Lissa L. Roberts - 2020 - History of Science 58 (4):485-506.
    A flurry of discussions about plagiarism and predatory publications in recent times has brought the issue of scientific misconduct in India to the fore. The debate has framed scientific misconduct in India as a recent phenomenon. This article questions that framing, which rests on the current tendency to define and police scientific misconduct as a matter of individual behavior. Without ignoring the role of individuals, this article contextualizes their actions by calling attention to the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31.  54
    A Review of the Types of Scientific Misconduct in Biomedical Research. [REVIEW]Malhar N. Kumar - 2008 - Journal of Academic Ethics 6 (3):211-228.
    Biomedical research has increased in magnitude over the last two decades. Increasing number of researchers has led to increase in competition for scarce resources. Researchers have often tried to take the shortest route to success which may involve performing fraudulent research. Science suffers from unethical research as much time, effort and cost is involved in exposing fraud and setting the standards right. It is better for all students of science to be aware of the methods used in fraudulent research so (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  32.  16
    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.
    Current DHHS regulations require that policies and procedures developed by institutions to handle allegations of scientific misconduct include provisions for “undertaking diligent efforts to protect the positions and reputations of those persons who, in good faith, make allegations.” Analogously, institutions receiving PHS funds are required to protect the confidentiality of those accused of such misconduct or, failing that, to restore their reputations if the allegations are not confirmed. Based on two surveys, one of whistleblowers and one of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  33.  51
    Effectiveness of Research Guidelines in Prevention of Scientific Misconduct.Eleanor G. Shore - 1995 - Science and Engineering Ethics 1 (4):383-387.
    In response to a series of allegations of scientific misconduct in the 1980’s, a number of scientific societies, national agencies, and academic institutions, including Harvard Medical School, devised guidelines to increase awareness of optimal scientific practices and to attempt to prevent as many episodes of misconduct as possible. The chief argument for adopting guidelines is to promote good science. There is no evidence that well-crafted guidelines have had any detrimental effect on creativity since they focus (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  34.  47
    Incarceration, Restitution, and Lifetime Debarment: Legal Consequences of Scientific Misconduct in the Eric Poehlman Case: Commentary On: “Scientific Forensics: How the Office of Research Integrity Can Assist Institutional Investigations of Research Misconduct During Oversight Review”.Samuel J. Tilden - 2010 - Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (4):737-741.
    Following its determination of a finding of scientific misconduct the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) will seek redress for any injury sustained. Several remedies both administrative and statutory may be available depending on the strength of the evidentiary findings of the misconduct investigation. Pursuant to federal regulations administrative remedies are primarily remedial in nature and designed to protect the integrity of the affected research program, whereas statutory remedies including civil fines and criminal penalties are designed to deter (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  35.  91
    Analysis of Citations to Biomedical Articles Affected by Scientific Misconduct.Anne Victoria Neale, Rhonda K. Dailey & Judith Abrams - 2010 - Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (2):251-261.
    We describe the ongoing citations to biomedical articles affected by scientific misconduct, and characterize the papers that cite these affected articles. The citations to 102 articles named in official findings of scientific misconduct during the period of 1993 and 2001 were identified through the Institute for Scientific Information Web of Science database. Using a stratified random sampling strategy, we performed a content analysis of 603 of the 5,393 citing papers to identify indications of awareness that (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  36.  27
    Correction and Use of Biomedical Literature Affected by Scientific Misconduct.Anne Victoria Neale, Justin Northrup, Rhonda Dailey, Ellen Marks & Judith Abrams - 2007 - Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (1):5-24.
    The purpose of this study was to identify and describe published research articles that were named in official findings of scientific misconduct and to investigate compliance with the administrative actions contained in these reports for corrections and retractions, as represented in PubMed. Between 1993 and 2001, 102 articles were named in either the NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts (“Findings of Scientific Misconduct”) or the U.S. Office of Research Integrity annual reports as needing retraction or correction. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  37.  21
    The Medical Research Council’s Approach to Allegations of Scientific Misconduct.Imogen Evans - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):91-94.
    The UK’s Medical Research Council (MRC) introduced a specific policy and procedure for inquiring into allegations of scientific misconduct in December 1997; previously cases had been considered under normal disciplinary procedures. The policy formally covers staff employed in MRC units, but those in receipt of MRC grants in universities and elsewhere are expected to operate under similar policies. The MRC’s approach is stepwise: preliminary action; assessment to establish prima facie evidence of misconduct; formal investigation; sanctions; and appeal. (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38.  28
    Testing Hypotheses on Risk Factors for Scientific Misconduct Via Matched-Control Analysis of Papers Containing Problematic Image Duplications.Daniele Fanelli, Rodrigo Costas, Ferric C. Fang, Arturo Casadevall & Elisabeth M. Bik - 2019 - Science and Engineering Ethics 25 (3):771-789.
    It is commonly hypothesized that scientists are more likely to engage in data falsification and fabrication when they are subject to pressures to publish, when they are not restrained by forms of social control, when they work in countries lacking policies to tackle scientific misconduct, and when they are male. Evidence to test these hypotheses, however, is inconclusive due to the difficulties of obtaining unbiased data. Here we report a pre-registered test of these four hypotheses, conducted on papers (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  39.  10
    Capital Report: Scientific Misconduct: III-Defined, Redefined.Joseph Palca - 1996 - Hastings Center Report 26 (5):4.
  40.  7
    Knowledge and Attitudes of Physicians Toward Research Ethics and Scientific Misconduct in Lebanon.Bilal Azakir, Hassan Mobarak, Sami Al Najjar, Azza Abou El Naga & Najlaa Mashaal - 2020 - BMC Medical Ethics 21 (1):1-10.
    Background Despite the implementation of codes and declarations of medical research ethics, unethical behavior is still reported among researchers. Most of the medical faculties have included topics related to medical research ethics and developed ethical committees; yet, in some cases, unethical behaviors are still observed, and many obstacles are still conferring to applying these guidelines. Methods This cross-sectional questionnaire-based study was conducted by interviewing randomly selected 331 Lebanese physicians across Lebanon, to assess their awareness, knowledge and attitudes on practice regarding (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  41.  5
    Publish or Be Ethical? Publishing Pressure and Scientific Misconduct in Research.Mariola Paruzel-Czachura, Lidia Baran & Zbigniew Spendel - 2020 - Research Ethics 17 (3):375-397.
    The paper reports two studies exploring the relationship between scholars’ self-reported publication pressure and their self-reported scientific misconduct in research. In Study 1 the participants...
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  42.  55
    How Frequently Do Allegations of Scientific Misconduct Occur in Ecology and Evolution, and What Happens Afterwards?Gregorio Moreno-Rueda - 2013 - Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (1):93-96.
    Scientific misconduct obstructs the advance of knowledge in science. Its impact in some disciplines is still poorly known, as is the frequency in which it is detected. Here, I examine how frequently editors of ecology and evolution journals detect scientist misconduct. On average, editors managed 0.114 allegations of misconduct per year. Editors considered 6 of 14 allegations (42.9%) to be true, but only in 2 cases were the authors declared guilty, the remaining being dropped for lack (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  43.  38
    Redundant Publication in Biomedical Sciences: Scientific Misconduct or Necessity? [REVIEW]Tom Jefferson - 1998 - Science and Engineering Ethics 4 (2):135-140.
    Redundant publication in biomedical sciences is the presentation of the same information or data set more than once. Forms of redundant publication include “salami slicing”, in which similar text accompanies data presented in disaggregated fashion in different publications and “duplicate or multiple publication” in which identical information is presented with a virtually identical text. Estimates of prevalence of the phenomenon put it at 10 to 25% of published literature. Redundant publication can be considered unethical, or fraudulent, when the author(s) attempt (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  44.  55
    A Rhetorical Analysis of Apologies for Scientific Misconduct: Do They Really Mean It?Lawrence Souder - 2010 - Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (1):175-184.
    Since published acknowledgements of scientific misconduct are a species of image restoration, common strategies for responding publicly to accusations can be expected: from sincere apologies to ritualistic apologies. This study is a rhetorical examination of these strategies as they are reflected in choices in language: it compares the published retractions and letters of apology with the letters that charge misconduct. The letters are examined for any shifts in language between the charge of misconduct and the response (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  45.  33
    Can Authorship Policies Help Prevent Scientific Misconduct? What Role for Scientific Societies?Anne Hudson Jones - 2003 - Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (2):243-256.
    The purpose of this article is to encourage and help inform active discussion of authorship policies among members of scientific societies. The article explains the history and rationale of the influential criteria for authorship developed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, examines questions about those criteria that emerge from authorship policies adopted by several U.S. medical schools, and summarizes the arguments for replacing authorship with the contributorguarantor model. Finally, it concludes with a plea for scientific societies (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  46.  40
    Using Criminalization and Due Process to Reduce Scientific Misconduct.Benjamin K. Sovacool - 2005 - American Journal of Bioethics 5 (5):W1-W7.
    The issue of how to best minimize scientific misconduct remains a controversial topic among bioethicists, professors, policymakers, and attorneys. This paper suggests that harsher criminal sanctions against misconduct, better protections for whistleblowers, and the creation of due process standards for misconduct investigations are urgently needed. Although the causes of misconduct and estimates of problem remain varied, the literature suggests that scientific misconduct?fraud, fabrication, and plagiarism of scientific research?continues to damage public health and (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  47.  14
    The History and Future of the Office of Research Integrity: Scientific Misconduct and Beyond. [REVIEW]Chris B. Pascal - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):183-198.
    This paper looks at the issues and controversies that led to creation of the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) and that dominated its agenda in the early years. The successes and failures of ORI are described and new problems identified. This paper then looks ahead to the future, considering what issues will dominate ORI’s agenda and affect the research institutions, individual scientists, and the scientific community in the next several years.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  48.  3
    Glory Days or the Lure of Scientific Misconduct.E. Knoll - 1996 - Journal of Information Ethics 5 (1):9-14.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  49.  16
    Off with Their Heads: The Need to Criminalize Some Forms of Scientific Misconduct.Barbara K. Redman & Arthur L. Caplan - 2005 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 33 (2):345-346.
    An increasingly long line of high-profile scientific misconduct cases raises the question of whether regulatory policy ought to incorporate more rigorous sanctions for investigators and their institutions. Broad and Wade graphically describe these cases through the early 1980s. They continue to recent times with the cases of Evan Dreyer, Kimon Angelides and Robert Liburdy, Justin Radolf, and others. In addition, recent Congressional investigation into conflict of interest concerns surrounding consulting by National Institutes of Health scientists has raised further (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  50.  9
    Off with Their Heads: The Need to Criminalize Some Forms of Scientific Misconduct.Barbara K. Redman & Arthur L. Caplan - 2005 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 33 (2):345-348.
    An increasingly long line of high-profile scientific misconduct cases raises the question of whether regulatory policy ought to incorporate more rigorous sanctions for investigators and their institutions. Broad and Wade graphically describe these cases through the early 1980s. They continue to recent times with the cases of Evan Dreyer, Kimon Angelides and Robert Liburdy, Justin Radolf, and others. In addition, recent Congressional investigation into conflict of interest concerns surrounding consulting by National Institutes of Health scientists has raised further (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
1 — 50 / 1000