Scientific Misconduct.
نویسنده
چکیده
Scientific misconduct has been defined as fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism. Scientific misconduct has occurred throughout the history of science. The US government began to take systematic interest in such misconduct in the 1980s. Since then, a number of studies have examined how frequently individual scientists have observed scientific misconduct or were involved in it. Although the studies vary considerably in their methodology and in the nature and size of their samples, in most studies at least 10% of the scientists sampled reported having observed scientific misconduct. In addition to studies of the incidence of scientific misconduct, this review considers the recent increase in paper retractions, the role of social media in scientific ethics, several instructional examples of egregious scientific misconduct, and potential methods to reduce research misconduct.
منابع مشابه
The study of the role of education in controlling scientific misconduct in Iran: using Grounded Theory
The study of the role of education in controlling scientific misconduct in Iran: using Grounded TheoryScientific misconduct in the most general sense is a deliberate violation of methodical and moral norms with the intention of deceiving others. Falsification, fabrication and plagiarism formally had been considered as the main examples of scientific misconduct by some researchers. In recent yea...
متن کاملMales Are Overrepresented among Life Science Researchers Committing Scientific Misconduct
UNLABELLED A review of the United States Office of Research Integrity annual reports identified 228 individuals who have committed misconduct, of which 94% involved fraud. Analysis of the data by career stage and gender revealed that misconduct occurred across the entire career spectrum from trainee to senior scientist and that two-thirds of the individuals found to have committed misconduct we...
متن کاملScientific Misconduct: Three Forms that Directly Harm Others as the Modus Operandi of Mill's Tyranny of the Prevailing Opinion
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...
متن کاملPrevalence of scientific misconduct among a group of researchers in Nigeria.
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 ada...
متن کاملThe visibility of scientific misconduct: A review of the literature on retracted journal articles
Retractions of scientific articles are becoming the most relevant institution for making sense of scientific misconduct. An increasing number of retracted articles, mainly attributed to misconduct, is currently providing a new empirical basis for research about scientific misconduct. This article reviews the relevant research literature from an interdisciplinary context. Furthermore, the result...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید
ثبت ناماگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید
ورودعنوان ژورنال:
- Annual review of psychology
دوره 67 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2016