Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Co-responsibility for research integrity.Carl Mitcham - 2003 - Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (2):273-290.
    To enlarge the discussion of scientific responsibility for research integrity, this paper offers two historico-philosophical observations. First, in the broad history of ideas, modern ethics replaces social role responsibility with appeals to abstract principles; by contrast, discussions within the scientific community of responsibility for research integrity constitute a rediscovery of the continuing vitality of role responsibility. This is a rediscovery from which philosophy itself may benefit. Second, within the context of scientists’ concerns, the idea of role responsibility has undergone significant (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  • Preparation for professional self-regulation.John M. Braxton & Leonard L. Baird - 2001 - Science and Engineering Ethics 7 (4):593-610.
    This article asserts that graduate study should include preparation for participation in the process of self-regulation to assure the responsible conduct of research in the scientific community. This article outlines the various ways in which doctoral study can incorporate such preparation. These suggested ways include the inculcation of general attitudes and values about professional self-regulation, various ways doctoral study can be configured so that future scientists are prepared to participate in the deterrence, detection and sanctioning of scientific wrongdoing. The stages (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Social-cognitive barriers to ethical authorship.Jordan R. Schoenherr - 2015 - Frontiers in Psychology 6.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • 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; (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Personal Experiences of Research Misconduct and the Response of Individual Academic Scientists.Alan E. Bayer & John M. Braxton - 1996 - Science, Technology and Human Values 21 (2):198-213.
    From a national U.S. sample of senior academic biochemists, ninety-four indicated that they personally knew of an incident of scientific wrongdoing. Among these individuals, less formal actions against an offending individual were endorsed when either actions were believed to have the potential to publicly embarrass the offending individual, or the actions might adversely affect the professional career of the whistleblower. These relationships remain significant after controlling for professional status, career age, and current level of formal departmental administrative responsibility. Study limitations (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Allocating Credit and Blame in Science.Daryl E. Chubin - 1988 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 13 (1-2):53-63.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations