Evolving Research Misconduct Policies and Their Significance for Physical Scientists

Science and Engineering Ethics

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 109-121

  Dooley, James J ^a   Kerch, Helen M ^b,c  

^a PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^b Environmental Measurements Laboratory   (United States)

^c U S DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY   (United States)

Author keywords

And public policy; Physical sciences; Scientific misconduct

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COST; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; LEGAL ASPECT; NATURAL SCIENCE; RESEARCH; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; STANDARD; UNITED STATES;

COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; GOVERNMENT AGENCIES; NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (U.S.); NATURAL SCIENCES; RESEARCH; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0033760192     PISSN: 13533452     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11948-000-0029-8     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Broad, W. and Wade, N. (1982) Betrayers of the Truth. Simon and Schuster, New York.
2. Cony, L., Renn, J., and Stachel, J. (1997) Belated Decision in the Hillbert-Einstein Priority Dispute. Science 278: 1270-1273.
3. 42 CFR 50. Subpart A. 1989. Responsibility of PHS Awardee and Applicant Institutions for Dealing with and Reporting Possible Misconduct in Science. Code of Federal Regulations.
4. National Science Foundation Inspector General's Office. (1997) Semiannual Report to the Congress: Number 17; April 1, 1997-September 30, 1991. Washington, DC.
5. National Science Foundation Inspector General's Office. (1997) Semiannual Report to the Congress: Number 16; October 1, 1996-March 31, 1997. Washington, DC.
6. Buzzelli, DE. (1999) Serious Deviation from Accepted Practices. Science and Engineering Ethics 5: 275-282.
7. Goldman, K.A. and Fisher, M.K. (1997) The Constitutionality of the 'Other Serious Deviations from Accepted Practices' Clause. Jurimetrics. pp. 149-168.
8. National Academy of Sciences. 1992. Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process, Volumes 1 and 2. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
9. Schachman, H.K. (1993) What is Misconduct in Science. Science 261: 148-149.
10. National Science Foundation Inspector General's Office. (1991) Semiannual Report to the Congress: Number 4; October 1, 1990-March 31, 1991. Washington, DC.
11. Woodward, J. and D. Goodstein (1996) Conduct. Misconduct and the Structure of Science. American Scientist 84: 479-490.
12. Office of Research Integrity. (1997) Promoting Integrity in Research. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC. http://hhs.gov/news/press/1997pres/970228.html
13. Shore, E.G. (1995) Effectiveness of Research Guidelines in Prevention of Scientific Misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics 1(4): 383-387.
14. Office of Research Integrity. (1997) Office of Research Integrity 1996 Annual Report. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC. http://phs.os.dhhs.gov/ phs.os.dhhs.vog/phs/ori/other/material.html#annrpt
15. Commission on Research Integrity. (1995) Integrity and Misconduct in Research: Report of the Commission on Research Integrity. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC.
16. Burd, S. (1995) Federal Panel Will Seek Tougher Rules on Scientific Misconduct. The Chronicle of Higher Education. November 3, 1995, p. A42.
17. Budeiri, P.R. (1996) The Return of Qui Tam. The Washington Lawyer, pp. 24-29.
18. Hoke, F. (1995) Novel Application of Federal Law to Scientific Fraud Worries University and Reinvigorates Whistleblowers. The Scientist 9(17): 4-5.
19. Hilts, P.J. (1997) University Forced to Pay $1.6 Million to Researcher. New York Times. August 10, 1997, p. 13.
20. Burk, D.L. (1995) False Claims Act Can Hamper Science with 'Bounty Hunter' Suits. The Scientist. 9(17): 12.
21. Swazey, J.P., Anderson, M.S., and Louis, K.S. (1993) Ethical Problems in Academic Research. American Scientist 81: 542.
22. Tarnow, E. (1999) The Authorship List in Science: Junior Physicists' Perceptions of Who Appears and Why. Science and Engineering Ethics 5(1): 73-88.
23. National Science Foundation Inspector General's Office. (1996) Semiannual Report to the Congress: Number 14; October 1, 1995-March 31, 1996. Washington, DC.
24. National Science Foundation Inspector General's Office. (1996) Semiannual Report to the Congress: Number 15; April 1, 1996-September 30, 1996. Washington, DC.
25. Goodstein, D. (1996) Conduct and Misconduct in Science, in: Gross, P., Levitt, N., and Lewis, M. eds. The Flight from Science and Reason. Vol. 775 of the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. The New York Academy of Sciences, New York. pp. 31-38.
26. Lubalin, J.S., Matheson, J.L., and Ardini, M.E. (1996) Survey of Accused but Exonerated Individuals in Research Misconduct Case. Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, NC.
27. Kevles, D.J. (1996) The Assault on David Baltimore. The New Yorker, May 27 1996, pp. 94-109.
28. Beardsley, T. (1996) Thereza Imanishi-Kari: Starting with a Clean Slate. Scientific American 275(5): 50-52.
29. Office of Research Integrity. (1996). Administrative Actions: Range, Rationale, Implementation Described. ORI Newsletter 4(2). http://phs.os.dhhs.vog/phs/ori/newsltr/vo4no2.html
30. Beck, W., Donahue, D., Jull, A., Burr, G., Broecker, W., Bonani, G., Hajdas, I., and, Malotki, E. (1998) Ambiguities in Direct Dating of Rock Surfaces Using Radiocarbon Measurements. Science 280(5372): 2132-2139.
31. Dalton, R. (1998) Dating in Doubt as Researcher is Probed. Nature 392: 218-219.
32. Francis, S. (1999) Developing a Common Federal Definition of Research Misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics 5: 262-272.