Preventing scientific misconduct
| Autor: | D L Weed |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 1998 |
| Předmět: |
Scientific enterprise
Biomedical Research Whistleblowing business.industry Scientific Misconduct Public Health Environmental and Occupational Health Disclosure Empirical Research Social Control Formal Antithesis Misconduct Empirical research Virtues Public trust Medicine Engineering ethics Congressional oversight business Scientific misconduct Social control Research Article |
| Zdroj: | American journal of public health. 88(1) |
| ISSN: | 0090-0036 |
| Popis: | When a case of serious scientific misconduct comes to light, reactions from scientists, legislators, journal editors, and the press are often swift and impassioned, reflecting the importance of a problem that strikes at the heart of the scientific enterprise. Science, after all, is a search for the truth. Misconduct, especially in the form of falsification or fabrication, is its antithesis. Biomedical science seems especially vulnerable to the serious consequences forecast by those involved in the extended discussion: Congressional oversight could become a reality, public trust could fray, and perhaps most ominous of all, patients could be harmed. Few authors agree on the frequency of scientific misconduct, owing to differing definitions and difficulties in measurement. Estimates vary widely. Nevertheless, nearly everyone agrees that preventing scientific misconduct is a worthy goal. How best to achieve that goal is not so clear. The purpose of this paper is to develop a framework for the prevention of scientific misconduct based on models familiar to public health professionals, to discuss some problems that emerge from such an analysis, and to propose tentative solutions to those problems. I begin with two questions: What is scientific misconduct, and how much of it exists? |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|