Skip to main content

Roles for scientific societies in promoting integrity in publication ethics

Abstract

Scientific societies can have a powerful influence on the professional lives of scientists. Using this influence, they have a responsibility to make long-term commitments and investments in promoting integrity in publication, just as in other areas of research ethics. Concepts that can inform the thinking and activities of scientific societies with regard to publication ethics are: the “hidden curriculum” (the message of actions rather than formal statements), a fresh look at the components of acting with integrity, deviancy as a normally occurring phenomenon in human society, and the scientific community as an actual community. A society’s first step is to decide what values it will promote, within the framework of present-day standards of good conduct of science and given the society’s history and traditions. The society then must create educational programs that serve members across their careers. Scientific societies must take seriously the implications of the problem; set policies and standards for publication ethics for their members; educate about and enforce the standards; bring the issues before the members early and often; and maintain continuing dialogue with editors.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. 42 C.F.R. §50.101

  2. 45 C.F.R. §689.1

  3. Office of Research Integrity, Office of Public Health and Science, US Department of Health and Human Services. (2000) Managing Allegations of Scientific Misconduct: A Guidance Document for Editors. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2000. http://ori.dhhs.gov accessed 11 Nov 2002)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Friedman, P.J. (2000) Research misconduct and the ethics of scientific publication, in: Jones, A. H. and McLellan, F., eds., Ethical Issues in Biomedical Publication, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 303–314 (Table 12.1, pp. 304–306).

    Google Scholar 

  5. The Education of Medical Students: Ten Stories of Curriculum Change. (2000) New York: Milbank Memorial Fund.

  6. Anderson, M.B., ed. & comp. (2000) A snapshot of medical students’ education at the beginning of the 21st century: reports from 130 schools, Academic Medicine 75 (Sept supplement, S1–S460).

  7. Christakis, D.A. & Feudtner, C. (1993) Ethics in a short white coat: The ethical dilemmas that medical students confront, Academic Medicine, 68: 249–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hafferty, F.W. & Franks, R. (1994) The hidden curriculum, ethics teaching, and the structure of medical education, Academic Medicine 69: 861–871.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Feudtner, C. & Christakis, D.A. (1994) Making the rounds: The ethical development of medical students in the context of clinical rotations, Hastings Center Report 24 (1, Jan–Feb): 6–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hafferty, F.W. (1998) Beyond curriculum reform: Confronting medicine’s hidden curriculum, Academic Medicine 73:403–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hundert, E. M., Hafferty, F. & Christakis, D. (1996) Characteristics of the informal curriculum and trainees’ ethical choices, Academic Medicine 71: 624–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Turbes, S., Krebs, E., & Axtell, S. (2002) The hidden curriculum in multicultural medical education: The role of case examples, Academic Medicine 77: 209–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Carter, S.L. (1996) Integrity, Basic Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Korenman, S. G. & Shipp, A.C. (1994) Teaching the responsible conduct of science through a case study approach: A handbook for instructors, Association of American Medical Colleges, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Macrina, F. L. (1995) Scientific integrity: An introductory text with cases, American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Douglas, J.D. (1993) Deviance in the practice of science, in Friedman, P. J., ed., Integrity in science, Academic Medicine 68 (supplement to issue 9, Sept): S77–83.

  17. Kelling, G. L., & Coles, C. M. (1996) Fixing broken windows: Restoring order and reducing crime in our communities and cities, Free Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wlson, J. Q. Thinking about crime. (1982) rev. ed. Vantage Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wilson, J. Q. & Kelling, G. L. (1982) Broken windows, in: Atlantic Monthly March, pp.29–38.

  20. DiIulio, J. J., Jr. (1995) Arresting ideas: rougher law enforcement is driving down urban crime, Policy Review 74: 12–16.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Pooley, E., with Rivera, E. (1996) One good apple, Time 15 January, 54–56.

  22. Friedman, P. J. (2000) Research misconduct and the ethics of scientific publication, in Jones, A. H. & McLellan, F., eds., Ethical Issues in Biomedical Publications, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, pp. 303–314.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Guarding the guardians: research on editorial peer review: selected proceedings from the First International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. (1990) JAMA 263(theme issue):1317–1441.

  24. Second International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. (1994) JAMA 272(theme issue):91–173.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Third International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. (1998) JAMA 280(theme issue):203–306. www.jama-peer.org

  26. Fourth International Congress on Peer Review in Biomedical Publication. (2002) JAMA 287(theme issue):2759–2871. www.jama-peer.org

  27. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME). (1997) Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals. 1997, maj. rev. 1999, 2001. www.icmje.org. Site accessed 10 December 2002.

  28. Engler, R.L., Covell, J. W., Friedman, P.J., Kitcher, P.S., & Peters, R.M. (1987) Misrepresentation and responsibility in medical research, New England Journal of Medicine 317: 1383–1389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Friedman, P. J. (1990) Correcting the literature following fraudulent publication, JAMA 263: 1416–1419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Gilmore. W.F. (2002) Membership and professional responsibility. American Scientist 90: 490.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Johnson, D. (1999) From denial to action: academic and science societies grapple with misconduct, in Braxton, J.M., ed., Perspectives on Scholarly Misconduct in the Sciences. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Brumfiel, G. (2002). Misconduct in physics: time to wise up? Nature 418: 120–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Goldstein, D. (2002) In the matter of J. Hendrick Schön. Physics World. www.physicsweb.org/article/world/15/11/2.

  34. Steneck, N.H. (2000) Assessing the Integrity of Publicly Funded Research. A background report for the November 2000 ORI Research Conference on Research Integrity Conference of the U.S. Office of Research Integrity, November 2000, Bethesda, Maryland. www-personal.umich.edu/~nsteneck/papers/RRI/backg_int.pdf. accessed 13 Jan 2003.

  35. Frankel, M.S. (1993) Professional societies and responsible conduct of research, in: Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy [U.S.], Panel on Scientific Responsibility and the Conduct of Research. Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Fischbach, R., ed. (1993) Educating for the Responsible Conduct of Research: NIH Policy and Other Mandates. Proceedings of the Public Responsibility in Medicine & Research conference, April 1–3, 1993, Boston. Boston: PRIM&R.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Fischbach, R.L., Shipp, A.C. (1994) Educating for the Responsible Conduct of Research: The Mandate, the Intent, and the Means: Proceedings of the Conference. Public Responsibility in Medicine & Research Conference, Boston, November 2–3, 1994. Boston: PRIM&R.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Fischbach, F.L., ed. (1996) The Responsible Conduct of Research: A Commitment for All Scientists. Proceedings of Conference of Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research. PRIM&R Conference, San Diego, CA, November 13–14, 1996. Boston: PRIM&R.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Fischbach, F.L., ed. (1999) Educating for the Responsible Conduct of Research in the Next Millennium: New Dilemmas, Continuing Questions, and Effective Strategies. Proceedings of Conference on Public Responsibility in Medicine and Research (PRIM&R), Boston, May 13–14, 1999. Boston: PRIM&R.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Fischbach, F.L., ed. (2001) Promoting Responsible Conduct of Research: Policies, Challenges, and Opportunities. Proceedings of Conference of Public Responsibility in Medicine & Research. Arlington, Virginia, May 18–19, 2001. Boston: PRIM&R.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Council of Biology Editors (CBE) [now Council of Science Editors], Editorial Policy Committee. Series of official positions.

  42. Caelleigh, A.S. (1993) Role of the journal editor in sustaining integrity in research, in: Friedman, P.J., ed., Integrity in research, Academic Medicine 68: (suppl to issue 9, Sept):S23–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. ———. (2000). Educating the leaders: toward systematic change, in: Jones, A. H., & McLellan, F., eds., Ethical Issues in Biomedical Publication, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, pp. 276–3000.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Addeane S. Caelleigh MA.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Caelleigh, A.S. Roles for scientific societies in promoting integrity in publication ethics. SCI ENG ETHICS 9, 221–241 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-003-0010-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-003-0010-4

Keywords

  • ethics and publication
  • ethics research
  • scientific and professional societies
  • integrity
  • behavior change