Abstract
Scientific (or research) misconduct has become a global concern. This entry reviews famous cases of misconduct or alleged misconduct; definitions of misconduct; policies for reporting, investigating, and adjudicating misconduct; incidence and causes of misconduct; and strategies for preventing misconduct.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Ana, J., Koehlmoos, T., Smith, R., & Yan, L. L. (2013). Research misconduct in low- and middle-income countries. PLoS Medicine, 10(3), e1001315.
Broad, W., & Wade, N. (1983). Betrayers of the truth: Fraud and deceit in the halls of science. New York: Simon and Schuster.
European Science Foundation. (2008). Stewards of integrity: Institutional approaches to promote and safeguard good research practice in Europe. Strasbourg: European Science Foundation.
Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS ONE, 4(5), e5738.
Kim, J., & Park, K. (2013). Ethical modernization: Research misconduct and research ethics reforms in Korea following the Hwang affair. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19(2), 355–380.
Martinson, B. C., Anderson, M. S., & de Vries, R. (2005). Scientists behaving badly. Nature, 435(7043), 737–738.
Office of Science and Technology Policy. (2000). Federal research misconduct policy. Federal Register, 65(235), 76260–76264.
Resnik, D. B. (2003). From Baltimore to bell labs: Reflections on two decades of debate about scientific misconduct. Accountability in Research, 10(2), 123–135.
Resnik, D. B., & Master, Z. (2013). Policies and initiatives aimed at addressing research misconduct in high-income countries. PLoS Medicine, 10(3), e1001406.
Resnik, D. B., Neal, T., Raymond, A., and Kissling, G. (2014). Misconduct definitions adopted by U.S. research institutions. Accountability in Research (in press).
Shamoo, A. E., & Resnik, D. B. (2014). Responsible conduct of research (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Singapore Statement on Research Integrity. (2010). Available at http://www.singaporestatement.org/statement.html. Accessed 5 Mar 2014.
Tri-Council Agency. (2011). Tri-Council Agency framework: Responsible conduct of research. Available at http://www.rcr.ethics.gc.ca/eng/policy-politique/framework-cadre/#311. Accessed 5 Mar 2104.
U.K. Research Council. (2012). The research ethics guidebook. Available at http://www.ethicsguidebook.ac.uk/Research-Council-funding-122. Accessed 5 Mar 2014.
Zeng, W., & Resnik, D. (2010). Research integrity in China: Problems and prospects. Developing World Bioethics, 10(3), 164–171.
Further Reading
Redman, B. K. (2013). Research misconduct policy in biomedicine. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
Wells, F., & Farthing, M. (Eds.). (2008). Fraud and misconduct in biomedical research (4th ed.). London: Royal Society of Medicine Press.
Acknowledgments
This entry is the work product of an employee or group of employees of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), National Institutes of Health (NIH). However, the statements, opinions, or conclusions contained therein do not necessarily represent the statements, opinions, or conclusions of NIEHS, NIH, or the US government.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this entry
Cite this entry
Resnik, D.B. (2014). Scientific Misconduct. In: ten Have, H. (eds) Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05544-2_392-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05544-2_392-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-05544-2
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities