Statistics, ethics, and research: An agenda for education and reform

Accountability in Research

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 163-188

  Resnik, David B ^a  

^a EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bias; Error; Honesty; Misconduct; Research ethics; Statistics

Indexed keywords

EID: 0038140701     PISSN: 08989621     EISSN: 15455815     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08989620008573971     Document Type: Review

References (66)

1. Abbott, A. (1999). Science comes to terms with the lessons of fraud. Nature, 398: 13-17.
2. American Statistical Association (1999). Ethical Guidelines for Statistical Practice. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.
3. Armstrong, J. (1997). Peer review for journals: evidence of quality control, fairness, and innovation, Science and Engineering Ethics, 3:63-84.
4. Babbage, C. (1970). Reflections on the Decline of Science in England. New York Augustus Kelley.
5. Bailar, J. (1986). Science, statistics, deception. Annals of Internal Medicine, 104:259-60.
6. Bailar, J. (1995). The practice of meta-analysis, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 48:149-57.
7. Baltimore, D. (1988). Quoted in Culliton B. 1988. A bitter battle over error. Science, 240: 1720.
8. Bok, S. (1982). Lying. New York: Pantheon Books.
9. Callaham, M. et al. (1998). Reliability of editors' subjective quality ratings of peer reviews of manuscripts, Journal of the American Medical Association, 280:229-31.
10. Chubin, D. and Hackett, E. (1990). Peerless Science. Albany, NY: S.U.N.Y. Press.
11. Commission on Research Integrity (1995). Integrity and Misconduct in Research. Washington: Public Health Service.
12. Davis, M. (1999). Rhetoric, technical writing, and ethics, Science and Engineering Ethics, 5:463-483.
13. DHHS (1989). Responsibilities of the PHS awardee and applicant institutions for dealing with and reporting possible misconduct in science. Final Rule. Federal Register, 56:32446-32451.
14. DeMets, D. (1999). Statistics and ethics in medical research. Science and Engineering Ethics, 5:97-117.
15. Easterbrook, P. et al. (1991). Publication bias in clinical research, Lancet, 337:867-72.
16. Franklin, A. (1981). Millikan's published and unpublished data on oil drops. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 11:185-201.
17. Freedman, B. and Shapiro, S. (1994). Ethics and statistics in clinical research: towards a more comprehensive examination. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 42(1-2): 223-40.
18. Freiman, J. et al. The importance of beta, the type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized control trial: survey of 71 "negative" trials. New England Journal of Medicine, 299: 690-94.
19. Friedberg, B. et al. (1999). Evaluation of conflict of interest in economic analyses of new drugs used in oncology Journal of the American Medical Association, 282:1453-57.
20. Friedly, J. (1997). ORI's self-assessment: a batting average of.920? Science, 275:1255.
21. Giere, R. (1991). Understanding Scientific Reasoning, 3rd edition. Chicago: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
22. Glick, J. (1989). On the cost effectiveness of data auditing. In Shamoo, A. (ed.). Principles of Research Data Audit. New York: Gordon and Breach: 111-20.
23. Glick, J. and Shamoo, A. (1991). Auditing biochemical research data: a case study. Accountability in Research, 1:223-43.
24. Glick, J. and Shamoo, A. (1993). A call for the development of "good research practices" (GPR) guidelines, Accountability in Research, 2:231-35.
25. Gould, S. (1981). The Mismeasure of Man. New York: WW Noreton.
26. Grinnell, F. (1992). The Scientific Attitude, 2nd ed. New York: Guilford Press.
27. Grinnell, F. (1999). Ambiguity, trust, and the responsible conduct of research. Science and Engineering Ethics, 5:205-14.
28. Guston, D. (1999). Changing explanatory frameworks in the U.S. Government's attempt to define research misconduct Science and Engineering Ethics, 5:137-54.
29. Hawkins, B. (1999). More haste, less science? (letter). Nature, 400:498.
30. Hempel, C. (1966). Philosophy of Natural Science. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
31. Hollander, R. et al. (1995). Why teach ethics in science and engineering? Science and Engineering Ethics, 1:83-87.
32. Holton, G. (1978). Subelectrons, presuppositions, and the Millikan-Ehrenhaft dispute, Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 9:166-224.
33. Howson, C. and Urbach, P. (1989). Scientific Reasoning. La Salle, IL: Open Court.
34. Huff, D. (1954). How to Lie with Statistics. New York WW Norton.
35. Hutton, J. (1996). The ethics of randomized controlled trials: a matter of statistical belief? Health Care Analysis, 4:95-102.
36. Ioannidis, J. (1998). Effect of the statistical significance of results on the time to completion and publication of randomized efficacy trials, Journal of the American Medical Association, 279:281-86.
37. Kaier, J. (1999). A misconduct definition that finally sticks. Science, 286:391.
38. Kestenbaum, D. (1998). Supreme Court gets lesson in enumeration, Science, 282:1969.
39. Kevles, D. (1998). The Baltimore Case. New York: WW Norton.
40. Kiang, N. (1995). How are scientific corrections made? Science and Engineering Ethics 1:347-56.
41. Kirk, R. (1995). Experimental Design, 3rd edition. New York: Brooks/Cole.
42. Kitcher, P. (1994). The Advancement of Knowledge. New York: Oxford University Press.
43. Krimsky, S. et al. (1996). Financial interests of authors in scientific journals: a pilot study of 14 publications. Science and Engineering Ethics, 4:395-410.
44. Krimsky, S. and Rothenberg, N. (1998). Financial interest and its disclosure in scientific publications. Journal of the American Medical Association, 280: 225-6.
45. LaFollette, M. (1992). Stealing into Print. Berkeley: University of California Press.
46. Laudan, L. (1977). Progress and Its Problems. Berkeley: University of California Press.
47. Longino, H. (1990). Science as Social Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
48. Macrina, F. (1995). Scientific Integrity. Washington: American Society for Microbiology Press.
49. Malakoff, D. (1999). Bayes offers a new way to make sense of numbers, Science, 286: 1460-64.
50. Misakian, A. and Bero, L. (1998). Publication bias and research on passive smoking: comparison of published and unpublished studies, Journal of the American Medical Association, 280:250-53.
51. Moore, D. and McCabe, G. (1998). Introduction to the Practice of Statistics, 3rd ed. New York WH Freeman.
52. NSF. (1991). Misconduct in science and engineering. Final Rule. Federal Register, 56:22286-22290.
53. Office of Research Integrity, (1999). Federal policy on research misconduct. Federal Register: October 14, 1999; 64, 198: 55722-55725.
54. Panel on Scientific Responsibility and the Conduct of Research. 1992. Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process, vol. 1. Washington: National Academy Press.
55. Popper, K. (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Routledge.
56. Rennie, D. (1999). Fair conduct and fair reporting of clinical trials, Journal of the American Medical Association, 282:1766-68.
57. Resnik, D. (1998a). The Ethics of Science, New York: Routledge.
58. Resnik, D. (1998b). Conflicts of interest in science. Perspectives on Science, 6(4): 381-408.
59. Simes, R. (1986). Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials, Journal of Clinical Oncology, 4: 1529-1541.
60. Shrader-Frechette, K. (1994). Ethics of Scientific Research. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
61. Steele, F. (1996). Clearing of researcher in Baltimore affair boosts demand for reform, Nature. 381:719-20.
62. Stem, J. and Simes, R. (1997). Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects, British Medical Journal, 315:640-45.
63. Thomsen, M. and Resnik, D. (1995). The effectiveness of erratum in reducing error propagation in physics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 1:231-240.
64. Whitbeck, C. (1995). Trust and trustworthiness in research, Science and Engineering Ethics, 1(4): 403-16.
65. Williams, J. et al. (1997). Low power, type II errors, and other statistical problems in recent cardiovascular research, American Journal of Physiology of the Heart and Circulation Physiology, 42:487-93.
66. Wright, T. (1998). Sampling and census 2000: the concepts, American Scientist, 86(3): 245-253.