Research integrity and research ethics in professional codes of ethics: Survey of terminology used by professional organizations across research disciplines

PLoS ONE

Volumn 10, Issue 7, 2015, Pages

  Komić, Dubravka ^a   Marušić, Stjepan Ljudevit ^b   Marušić, Ana ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SPLIT   (Croatia)

^b ROGOR   (Croatia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CONSTRUCTION TRADE; ENGINEERING; ETHICS; FRATERNAL SOCIAL ORGANIZATION; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL SOCIETY; MENTAL HEALTH; NOMENCLATURE; NON PROFIT ORGANIZATION; ORGANIZATION; PRESCRIPTIVE LANGUAGE; PREVALENCE; PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION; PROFESSIONAL CODE OF ETHICS; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; QUALITY CONTROL; REAL ESTATE; RESEARCH ETHICS; RESEARCH FABRICATION; RESEARCH FALSIFICATION; RESEARCH INTEGRITY; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; SOCIOLOGY; FACTUAL DATABASE; ILLINOIS; MEDICAL ETHICS; PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT; QUESTIONNAIRE; RESEARCH; SCIENCE; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; UNIVERSITY;

CODES OF ETHICS; DATABASES, FACTUAL; ETHICS, RESEARCH; HUMANS; ILLINOIS; MENTAL HEALTH; PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT; RESEARCH; SCIENCE; SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT; SOCIAL SCIENCES; SOCIETIES; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC; UNIVERSITIES;

EID: 84941767729     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0133662     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bateman CR. Proessional ethical standards: The journey toward effective codes of ethics. In: Reilly NP, Sirgy MJ, Gorman CA, editors. Work and quality of life. Ethical practices in organizations. Amsterdam: Springer Netherlands; 2012. pp 21-34.
2. Fanelli D. How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS One 2009; 4: e5738. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005738 PMID: 19478950
3. Marušić A, Bošnjak L, Jerončić A. A systematic review of research on the meaning, ethics and practices of authorship across scholarly disciplines. PLoS One 2011; 6: e23477. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone. 0023477 PMID: 21931600
4. Joseph A, Koehlmoos T, Smith R, Yan LL. Research misconduct in low- and middle-income countries. PLoS Medicine 2013; 10: e1001315. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001315 PMID: 23555197
5. Schwartz MS. Effective corporate codes of ethics: Perceptions of code users. J Bus Ethics 2003; 55: 323-343.
6. Steneck NH. Fostering integrity in research: definitions, current knowledge, and future directions. Sci Eng Ethics 2006; 12: 53-74. PMID: 16501647
7. Kaptein M, Schwartz MS. The effectiveness of business codes: A critical examination of existing studies and the development of an integrated model. J Bus Ethics 2008; 77: 111-127.
8. Rose M. What professionals expect: Scientific professional organizations' statements regarding authorship. In: Manson CJ, Geoscience Information Society, editors. Science editing & information management, Proceedings of the Second International AESE/CBE/EASE Joint Meeting, Sixth International Conference on Geoscience Information and Thirty-second Annual Meeting, Association of Earth Science Editors; 1998 Sep 10-22 Washington DC. Alexandria, VA: Geoscience Information Society; 1998. pp. 15-22.
9. Bošnjak L, Marušić A. Prescribed practices of authorship: review of codes of ethics from professional bodies and journal guidelines across disciplines. Scientometrics 2012; 93: 751-763.
10. Bullock M, Panicker S. Ethics for all: Differences across scientific society codes. Sci Eng Ethics 2003; 9: 159-170. PMID: 12774648
11. Olson A. Authoring a code of ethics: observations on process and organization. The Center for the Study of Ethics in the Professions (CSEP), Illinois Institute of Technology, 1998. Available: http://ethics. iit.edu/ecodes/authoring-code. Accessed: 1 May 2014.
12. Center for the Study of Ethics in the Professions. Codes of Ethics Collection. Illinois Institute of Technology; 2014. Available: http://ethics.iit.edu/ecodes/. Accessed: 1 May 2014.
13. Komić D, Marušić SL, Marušić A. Policies on responsible conduct of research in professional codes of ethics. 3rd World Conference on Research Integrity, Montreal, Canada, 5-8 May 2013, Poster session Tuesday 7 May 2013. Available: http://www.wcri2013.org/program2-e.shtml. Accessed: 27 December 2014.
14. Cogan ML. Towards a definition of a profession. Harvard Educational Review 1953; 23: 33-50.
15. Baždarić K, Bilić-Zulle L, Brumini G, Petrovečki M. Prevalence of plagiarism in recent submissions to the Croatian Medical Journal. Sci Eng Ethics 2012; 18: 223-239. doi: 10.1007/s11948-011-9347-2 PMID: 22207497
16. Sama LM, Shoaf V. Ethical leadership for the professions: Fostering a moral community. J Bus Ethics 2008; 78: 39-46.
17. Farrell H, Farrell BJ. The language of business codes of ethics: implications of knowledge and power. J Bus Ethics 1998; 17: 587-601.
18. Antiel RM, Curlin FA, Hook CC, Tilburt JC. The impact of medical school oaths and other professional codes of ethics: Results of a national physician survey. Arch Intern Med 2011; 171: 469-470. doi: 10. 1001/archinternmed.2011.47 PMID: 21403046
19. Erwin PM. Corporate codes of conduct: The effects of code content and quality on ethical performance. J Bus Ethics 2011; 99: 535-548.
20. Wynia MK. A unified code of ethics for health professionals. Insights from an IOM workshop. JAMA 2014; 311: 799-800. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.504 PMID: 24570240