Fraud: Causes and culprits as perceived by science and the media. Institutional changes, rather than individual motivations, encourage misconduct

EMBO Reports

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 3-7

  Franzen, Martina ^a   Rödder, Simone ^a   Weingart, Peter ^a  

^a BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOETHICS; EMBRYONIC STEM CELL; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PEER REVIEW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; RESEARCH ETHICS; REVIEW; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT;

ACADEMIES AND INSTITUTES; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; INDIVIDUALITY; MASS MEDIA; MOTIVATION; RESEARCH DESIGN; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT;

EID: 33846022739     PISSN: 1469221X     EISSN: 14693178     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/sj.embor.7400884     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. Broad WJ, Wade N (1982) Betrayers of the Truth: Fraud and Deceit in the Halls of Science. New York, NY, USA: Simon and Schuster
2. Check E, Cyranoski D (2005) Korean scandal will have global fallout. Nature 438: 1056-1057
3. De Vries R, Anderson MS, Martinson BC (2006) Normal misbehavior: scientists talk about the ethics of research. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 1: 43-50
4. Editorial (2006) Correction or retraction? Nature 444: 123-124
5. Fuchs S, Westervelt SD (1996) Fraud and trust in science. Perspect Biol Med 39: 248-269
6. Gabehart ME (2005) An Analysis of Citations to Retracted Articles in the Scientific Literature. Thesis. Chapel Hill, NC, USA: University of North Carolina
7. Giles J (2005) Taking on the cheats. Nature 435: 258-259
8. Goodstein D (2002) Conduct and Misconduct in Science. www.its.caltech.edu/~dg/conduct_art.html
9. Großmann S (2003) Der Teufel steckt im Detail. WPK Quart 4: 5-6
10. Institute of Medicine and National Research Council Committee on Assessing Integrity in Research Environments (2002) Integrity in Scientific Research: Creating an Environment that Promotes Responsible Conduct. Washington, DC, USA: National Academy Press
11. Kreutzberg GW (2004) The rules of good science. EMBO Rep 5: 330-332
12. Lawrence PA (2003) The politics of publication. Nature 422: 259-261
13. Martinson BC, Anderson MS, De Vries R (2005) Scientists behaving badly. Nature 435: 737-738
14. Martinson BC, Anderson MS, Crain AL, De Vries R (2006) Scientists' perceptions of organizational justice and self-reported misbehaviors. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 1: 51-66
15. Mayntz R (1999) Betrug in der Wissenschaft: Randerscheinung oder wachsendes Problem? Working Paper 99/4. Köln, Germany: Max-Planck-Institut für Gesellschaftsforschung
16. McCook A (2006) Is peer review broken? The Scientist 20: 26-34
17. Media Tenor (2004) Politik und Verbrechen. Media Tenor 144: 84-86
18. Merton RK (1942) Science and technology in a democratic order. J Leg Polit Sociol 1: 115-126
19. Nath SB, Marcus SC, Druss BG (2006) Retractions in the research literature: Misconduct or mistakes? Med J Aust 185: 152-154
20. Observatoire des Sciences et des Techniques (2006) Key Figures on Science and Technology. Paris, France: Economica
21. Ombudsman der DFG (2006) Zum Umgang mit wissenschaftlichem Fehlverhalten. Abschlussbericht, Ergebnisse der ersten sechs Jahre Ombudsarbeit Mai 1999-Mai 2005. Bonn, Germany: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
22. Pahl C (1998) Die Bedeutung von Wissenschaftsjournalen für die Themenauswahl in den Wissenschaftsressorts deutscher Zeitungen am Beispiel medizinischer Themen. Rundfunk Fernsehen 46: 243-253
23. Patsopoulos NA, Ioannidis JP, Analatos AA (2006) Origin and funding of the most frequently cited papers in medicine: Database analysis. BMJ 332: 1061-1064
24. Pfeiffer C, Windzio M, Kleimann M (2005) Media use and its impacts on crime perception, sentencing attitudes and crime policy. Eur J Criminol 2: 259-285
25. Snyder EY, Loring JF (2006) Beyond fraud - stem-cell research continues. New Engl J Med 354: 321-324
26. Sox HC, Rennie D (2006) Research misconduct, retraction, and cleansing the medical literature: Lessons from the Poehlman case. Ann Intern Med 144: 609-613
27. Weingart P (2001) Die Stunde der Wahrheit. Zum Verhältnis der Wissenschaft zu Politik, Wirtschaft und Medien in der Wissensgesellschaft. Weilerswist, Germany: Velbrück
28. Weingart P (2005) Die Wissenschaft der Öffentlichkeit: Essays zum Verhältnis von Wissenschaft, Medien und Öffentlichkeit. Weilerswist, Germany: Velbrück
29. Wormer H (2006) Mitgeschrieben, mitgefangen? Erfahrungen und Fortschritte im Umgang mit 'Phantom-Autoren' in Naturwissenschaft und Medizin in Deutschland. Information Wissenschaft Praxis 57: 99-102