The problem of plagiarism

Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations

Volumn 29, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 90-94

  Anderson, Melissa S ^a   Steneck, Nicholas H ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

Federal definition of plagiarism; Plagiarism; Research misconduct; Scientific misconduct; Self plagiarism

Indexed keywords

ADULT; CASE REPORT; COMPUTER PROGRAM; GOVERNMENT; HUMAN; MISCONDUCT; POLICY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESEARCH; REVIEW; SCIENCE; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; UNITED STATES;

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT; HUMANS; PLAGIARISM; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; UNITED STATES;

EID: 78650650687     PISSN: 10781439     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2010.09.013     Document Type: Review

References (19)

1. Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy: Federal policy on research misconduct. Federal register 2000, 65:76260-76264.
2. Schulz W.G. A massive case of fraud: Journal editors are left reeling as publishers move to rid their archives of scientist's falsified research. Chem Eng News 2008, 86:37-38.
3. Jayaraman K. Chemistry's 'colossal' fraud. Chemistry World Accessed 25 March, 2008. http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2008/March/25030801.asp.
4. Broad W.J. Would-be academician pirates papers. Science 1980, 208:1438-1440.
5. Friedman P.J. Correcting the literature following fraudulent publication. JAMA 1990, 263:1416-1419.
6. Maintaining the integrity of scholarship 1984, University of Michigan, Joint Task on Integrity of Scholarship, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
7. United States Congress Health Research Extension Act of 1985. In 99th Congress Ed., 1985.
8. Special Issue: Policies and Procedures for Dealing with Possible Misconduct in Science. NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts 1986, 15:1-37. National Institutes of Health.
9. Steneck N.H. Research Misconduct. Encyclopedia of Education 2002, MacMillian, New York. 2nd ed.
10. Schachman H.K. What is misconduct in science?. Science 1983, 261:148-149.
11. Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process 1992, 5. National Academies of Science, Committee on Science Engineering and Public PolicyCommittee on Science Engineering and Public Policy, Panel on Scientific Responsibility and the Conduct of ResearchPanel on Scientific Responsibility and the Conduct of Research, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C, 54 and 55.
12. Commission on Research Integrity: Integrity and Misconduct in Research 1995, 8. Department of Health and Human Services, Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, 15, and 39.
13. ORI Policy on Plagiarism. ORI Newsletter 1994, 3. Office of Research Integrity.
14. ORI Annual Report. 1993 ff #2001. Accessed September 30, 2010. http://ori.dhhs.gov/html/publications/annual-reports.asp.
15. Rhoades LJ. ORI Closed Investigations into misconduct allegations involving research supported by the Public Health Service: 1994-2003: Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Research Integrity, September 2004.
16. Fisher P. New Research Misconduct Policies, n.d Accessed September 30, 2010. http://www.nsf.gov/oig/session.pdf.
17. Semiannual Report to the Congress National Science Foundation, 1989;43. ff, Accessed September 30, 2010. http://www.nsf.gov/oig/semiannuals.jsp.
18. Martinson B.C., Anderson M.S., De Vries R. Scientists behaving badly. Nature 2005, 435:737-738.
19. The Gallup Organization. Final Report: Observing and Reporting Suspected Misconduct in Biomedical Research. Washington, DC: 2006, 2008.