Research Integrity Research Papers - Academia.edu (original) (raw)

Truth, trust and integrity are essential to research at higher education institutions. These institutions have accordingly adopted several policies to foster research integrity. This article explores the likelihood that relevant policies at a selected institution of higher education foster research integrity. The qualitative, single exploratory case study commences with a review of scholarly literature and results in a conceptual model used for a directed content analysis of relevant institutional policies. The findings indicate that these policies do complement each other in fostering research integrity. Further research will be necessary to establish whether policies indeed contribute to responsible researcher conduct.

- by
- •
- Research Ethics, Political Science, Research Misconduct, Regulation
- by Percy Mayta-Tristan
- •
- Psychology, Computer Science, Ethics, Applied Ethics

Integrity in research is fundamental to the advancement of knowledge, for the public’s support of research, and the autonomy of the academic profession. Misconduct in the forms of fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism introduces error and misrepresentation into the scientific record. This chapter reviews the history of research integrity and misconduct in the United States, as well as the nature and prevalence of misconduct. It then turns to factors associated with misconduct and efforts to promote integrity, which include policy and regulation, normative pressure, codes of conduct, training, and mentoring.

- by Marta A. Shaw
- •
- Ethics, Research Ethics, Higher Education, Research Misconduct

This paper focuses on the infamous case of Hwang Woo Suk, the South-Korean national hero and once celebrated pioneer of stem cell research. After briefly discussing the evolution of his publication and research scandal in Science, I will attempt to outline the main reactions that emerged within scientific and bioethical discourses on the problem of research misconduct in contemporary biosciences. What were the ethical lapses in his research? What kind of research misconduct has been identified? How this kind of misconduct affects scientific integrity? How to avoid it? Focusing on these questions, the paper interprets the Hwang’s case as a case study that might shed light on the worst aspects of highstakes global science. This case presents a group of problems that might endanger scientific integrity and public trust. Regulatory oversight, ethical requirements and institutional safeguards are often viewed by the scientific community as merely decelerating scientific progress and causing delays in the application of treatments. The Hwang’s case represents how unimpeded progress works in contemporary science. Thus, the case might shed light on the often neglected benefits of “the social control of science”.

- by Péter Kakuk
- •
- Scientific Integrity, Research Integrity

Plagiarism is a serious, yet widespread type of research misconduct, and is often neglected in developing countries. Despite its far-reaching implications, plagiarism is poorly acknowledged and discussed in the academic setting, and insufficient evidence exists in Latin America and developing countries to inform the development of preventive strategies. In this context, we present a longitudinal case study of seven instances of plagiarism and cheating arising in four consecutive classes (2011-2014) of an Epidemiology Masters program in Lima, Peru, and

- by Antonio M Quispe
- •
- Ethics, Bioethics, Research Misconduct, Plagiarism

Un cod de etică a cercetării științifice este un produs îndelung amânat în spațiul public românesc de specialitate. Era anunțat ( ca fiind de realizat în șase luni de zile !) prin legea 319 din 2003.Ulterior, sub diferite denumiri, același cod este menționat în legi subsecvente (206/2004, 1/2011). Abia acum, Consiliul Național de Etică a Cercetării Științifice (CNE) din Ministerul Cercetării și Inovării pune în circuit un astfel de cod. După elaborare din 2018-2019 și punerea în discuție publică în mai 2019 a fost definitivată forma finală, atașată. Periodic va fi actualizată de către CNE. Urmează , conform aceleiași legi 319/2003 mult neglijată, să fie elaborate și coduri de etică a cercetării specializate pe domenii. Avizarea Codului ar urma să fie făcută de către Guvernul României. Așa prevede legea 319. Personal cred că ar fi fost mai bine ca avizarea să revină, ca și în multe alte țări , unui organism științific, nu politic, dar.... Deocamdată, însă, fundamental este ca Ministerul Cercetării să finalizeze avizarea necesară a Codului, ieșind din lunga tradiție a amânărilor sine die. Sunt bine-venite orice întrebări legate de argumentarea pentru opțiunile Cod-ului sau pentru drumul lui instituțional (Dumitru Sandu).

- by Dumitru Sandu
- •
- Research Ethics, Romanian Studies, Plagiarism, Research Integrity

This paper proposes a normative taxonomy by which universities can express the extent to which they meet five core epistemic responsibilities. Epistemic responsibilities are responsibilities that have to do with the attainment of knowledge and understanding. The core epistemic responsibilities, which we call the Big Five, are to (1) foster research integrity, (2) teach for intellectual virtue, (3) address the big questions of life, (4) give humanistic inquiry and education a proper place, and (5) serve society. The paper characterizes the Big Five in some detail and explains why they are core epistemic responsibilities of universities. The paper concludes by describing the steps that should be taken in order to test, amend, and implement the taxonomy.

- by Rik Peels and +1
- •
- Teaching and Learning, Humanities, Science Policy, Transformation of University Systems

Academic plagiarism is one of the challenges the academic institutions meet in maintaining the high-quality standards of research and higher education. The contradictions between legal and ethical regulation of plagiarism cases indicate the need for more efficient solutions for prevention and resolution of the plagiarism and other acts of research misconduct at academic institutions. This paper presents a case study of the lawsuit where one Lithuanian University
was sued for “illegal revocation” of a doctoral degree due to plagiarism. The arguments provided by the parties to the legal process during the court hearings illustrate the prevalence of cynical attitude towards ethical norms and regulations in academia as well as in wider society. The
authors suggest that academic institutions should rely more on the multiple benefits provided by ethics tools and that the congruence between legal and ethical norms is essential for building academic integrity.

- by Agne Jurciukonyte
- •
- Cheating and Plagiarism, Research Integrity

A digital signature is a method that serves to improve the integrity, authenticity, non-repudiation, and confidentiality of digital data in transmission. This paper discusses digital signature and encryption functions for data communication. In this study, implementing the data transmission is done by email using digital signatures and encryption functionality on Open PGP. In the end, this research resulted that the function of the digital signature and encryption can be implemented effectively in the process of sending data/ information via email.

In the past two decades, individual explanations of scientific misconduct ('bad apples') have increasingly given way to systemic explanations ('bad systems'). Where did this interest in systemic factors (publication pressure, competition for research funding) come from? Given that research ethicists often present their interventions as responses to scientific misconduct, this article tests the hypothesis that these systemic explanations were triggered by high-visibility cases of scientific norm violation. It does so by examining why Dutch scientists in 2011 explained Diederik Stapel's grand-scale data fabrication largely in systemic terms, whereas only fifteen years earlier, in the René Diekstra affair (1996), such explanations had been close to absent. Drawing on a wealth of historical sources, the article suggests that cases like Stapel's as such do not explain why early 21st-century commentators exchanged individual explanations for systemic ones. Only against the background of an existing discourse of criticism of the science system, developed in the 1990s and 2000s in response to rapidly increasing competition for research funding, could the Stapel affair achieve notoriety as an example of how systemic factors provoke bad conduct.

- by Herman Paul
- •
- Intellectual History, Research Ethics, History of Science, Academic Integrity

This report serves as a basis to further common understanding on academic integrity through learning new terms and rediscovering old terms in new contexts. The need for this document derives from the variety of terms that are commonly used, but under different contexts. In this sense, we attempted to arrive at a common meaning.
This report could be of value to national ombudspersons, judicial authorities, compliance officers, research project managers and other related bodies or units in academia as well as students, business sector and others.

- by Loreta Tauginiene and +1
- •
- Academic Integrity, Vocabulary, Research Integrity, Glossary

Innovation and the development of knowledge in the field of scientific research is increasing exponentially, but it continues to be disjointed. It makes it difficult to keep up with state-of-the-art and to be at the forefront of research and dissemination, as well as to evaluate empirical evidence in the area of academic excellence. Recent literature reviews are frequently lacking in thoroughness and rigor and are carried out in part rather than using a specific design. This descriptive-mapping review aimed to illustrate plagiarism and research integrity literature published over a 10-year period (2010 to 2020). To achieve this goal, literature reviews were conducted to obtain relevant articles and documentation on plagiarism and its potential impact in the academic and publishing industries. Methodical searches in specific databases such as Web of Science and Scopus, including the Google Scholar Search Engine, have been undertaken to ensure the accuracy of the results. Thereafter, descriptive mapping was used to categorize qualifying articles. Over 350 titles were collected from the searches, of which 129 complete works were published in various journals during the covered period. Finally, in this review, 35 papers were eligible for inclusion. The themes were enumerated in the scholarly articles. Findings revealed a dearth of scientifically credible and relevant literature on plagiarism issues, such as the phenomenon in the academic environment, its particular specific factors and triggering causes, and the impacts of the institutional policy interventions being enforced. Although the results provided background information for the creation of a realistic guide to avoid plagiarism incidences, robust empirical and evaluative studies should be planned to identify the real implications of preventing plagiarism to uphold the credibility of scientific research and evaluate the impact of ethical issues, practices, and policies suggested by organizations and industries.

" Transparency and corruption challenges in the defence sphere often affect not only transition states but also established democracies. This compendium, the product of cooperation between Transparency International UK, the NATO PfP team and DCAF, focuses on concepts and tools which can ensure good practices in defence management and policy through 'integrity building'.

- by Todor Tagarev and +1
- •
- Anti-Corruption, Research Integrity
- by The Future of Science and Ethics and +1
- •
- Medical Sociology, Philosophy, Ethics, Philosophy of Science

Summary
Through review of the bioethics and global health literatures, and examination of guidance documents on ethical authorship, we identified a set of issues regarding authorship in collaborative partnerships between researchers from low-middle income countries and high income countries. We propose several recommendations to address these concerns.

- by Elise Smith
- •
- Research Ethics, Collaboration, Global Health, Authorship Attribution
- by The Future of Science and Ethics
- •
- Philosophy, Ethics, Philosophy of Science, Technology

Honesty in scientific publication is critical for scientific advancement, but dishonesty is commonly and increasingly observed in the forms of misconduct and other questionable practices. Focusing on dishonest conformity in peer review, in which authors unwillingly obey referees’ instructions in order to have their papers accepted even if the instructions contradict the author’s scientific belief, the current study aims to investigate the determinants of dishonesty. Drawing on survey data of Japanese life scientists, this study shows that the conflict between authors and referees in peer review is quite common, under which a majority of scientists follow referees’ instructions rather than to refute them. The results suggest that conformity occurs more frequently 1) in biology than in medicine and agriculture, 2) when authors are under stronger scientific competition, 3) if authors are associate professors rather than full professors, 4) if authors have no foreign research experience, and 5) in low-impact journals rather than in medium-impact journals.

- by Sotaro Shibayama
- •
- Science Policy, Research Ethics, Scientific Integrity, Research Misconduct
- by Roberto Andorno
- •
- Education Research Ethics, Research Integrity, Teaching of Ethics

Research ethics is concerned with ethical issues that can arise while conducting research. Social science research entails a combination of three equal entities: process, context and human agency. In each study, these entities demand rich interaction with each other. Generally, research ethics questions the interrelation between the research context and the human involvement established within that context. The research context and interaction between researcher and research participants lead to variations in the construction of knowledge, while research ethics plays a major role throughout all undertakings. In this narrative review paper, I have critically reflected my arguments on behalf of research ethics as a context-specific issue. I argued that the one-size-fits-all approach of research ethics is not viable by presenting ethical practices from the South Asian perspective. The paper is organized in three specific sections-ethical theories, research ethics and its contextual practices. Research ethics is very much a private affair and directly linked to the personal outlook of the researcher towards others. The ethical issue in research is not generic, but specific to the research context, i.e. the context of the research determines what form of behaviour is ethical and what is not. I explore the idea that the South Asian context may have its own system to conduct research ethically, as in euro-western and indigenous systems.

- by Bibek Dahal
- •
- Ethics, Research Ethics, South Asian Studies, Academic Integrity

This monograph contributes to the scientific misconduct debate from an oblique perspective, by analysing seven novels devoted to this issue, namely: Arrowsmith by Sinclair Lewis (1925), The affair by C.P. Snow (1960), Cantor’s Dilemma by Carl Djerassi (1989), Perlmann’s Silence by Pascal Mercier (1995), Intuition by Allegra Goodman (2006), Solar by Ian McEwan (2010) and Derailment by Diederik Stapel (2012). Scientific misconduct, i.e. fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, but also other questionable research practices, have become a focus of concern for academic communities worldwide, but also for managers, funders and publishers of research. The aforementioned novels offer intriguing windows into integrity challenges emerging in contemporary research practices. They are analysed from a continental philosophical perspective, providing a stage where various voices, positions and modes of discourse are mutually exposed to one another, so that they critically address and question one another. They force us to start from the admission that we do not really know what misconduct is. Subsequently, by providing case histories of misconduct, they address integrity challenges not only in terms of individual deviance but also in terms of systemic crisis, due to current transformations in the ways in which knowledge is produced. Rather than functioning as moral vignettes, the author argues that misconduct novels challenge us to reconsider some of the basic conceptual building blocks of integrity discourse.

- by Hub Zwart
- •
- Research Ethics, Research Misconduct, Jacques Lacan, Science, Technology and Literature

In this article, we address the international dimension of Stellenbosch University (SU) during the apartheid era, most notably during the academic boycott of South African universities between the early 1960s and the early 1990s. Based on information gathered from the documentary sources of the university and interviews with key role players at the university, the findings of the research will put some of the well established hypotheses on South Africa’s academic isolation and an increasing localism in higher education during that period into perspective. The article will show that prior to 1990 there were different kinds of international activities going on at SU, despite the academic boycotts.

Skills in writing papers for scientific journals have become crucial across academia, and universities everywhere are arranging writing courses in their ph. d programs. During two decades of teaching such courses I have witnessed how research integrity has emerged from a non-issue to an increasingly important topic. This contribution to a symposium on research integrity at The Royal Society of Arts and Sciences in Gothenburg in 2017 analyzes these content changes. The first section deals with the practice-oriented issues at the center during the first years: how to write and to manage the review process. The next section presents the historical development of scientific communication, why publishing in peer-reviewed journals now occupies such a central place, and the functions fulfilled by this form of publishing. Section three focuses on ethics and integrity, and presents recent research on retractions and editorial experiences in the fields of management, organization and economics. The final section discusses the problems of fragmented control in modern academia and the asymmetry between rapid entry and exceedingly slow exits in leading journals. The paper concludes with suggesting that academia needs to study the drug-fighting institutions in international sports to improve its capacity to expose and sanction unethical behavior.

- by Christian Berggren
- •
- Academic Writing, Research Misconduct, Science Writing, Academic Ethics
- by Rshood Khraif and +1
- •
- Research Methodology, Population Studies, Research Integrity

While attention to research integrity has been growing over the past decades, the processes of signalling and denouncing cases of research misconduct remain largely unstudied. In this article, we develop a theoretically and empirically informed understanding of the causes and consequences of reporting research misconduct in terms of power relations. We study the reporting process based on a multinational survey at eight European universities (N = 1126). Using qualitative data that witnesses of research misconduct or of questionable research practices provided, we aim to examine actors' rationales for reporting and not reporting misconduct, how they report it and the perceived consequences of reporting. In particular we study how research seniority, the temporality of work appointments, and gender could impact the likelihood of cases being reported and of reporting leading to constructive organisational changes. Our findings suggest that these aspects of power relations play a role in the reporting of research misconduct. Our analysis contributes to a better understanding of research misconduct in an academic context. Specifically, we elucidate the processes that affect researchers' ability and willingness to report research misconduct, and the likelihood of universities taking action. Based on our findings, we outline specific propositions that future research can test as well as provide recommendations for policy improvement. Keywords Research integrity · Research misconduct · Whistleblowing · Power relations · Organisations Serge P. J. M. Horbach and Eric Breit have contributed equally to this article. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https ://doi.

- by Svenn-Erik Mamelund and +1
- •
- Research Misconduct, Power relations, Research Integrity, Wistleblowing

The interest of geoscientists in (geo)ethical aspects of geoscience knowledge, education, research and practice is rising and today geoethics has a significant visibility. This prominence is the result of hard work done in the last 4 years by the IAPG – International Association for Promoting Geoethics (http://www.geoethics.org), a
not-for-profit, multidisciplinary, scientific network (with more than 1350 members in 107 countries) established for widening the discussion and creating awareness about problems of ethics applied to the geosciences.
IAPG has produced a strong conceptual substratum on which to base the future development of geoethics, by clarifying the meaning of the word Geoethics, formalizing its definition, and identifying a framework of
reference values on which the geoscience community can base more effective codes of conduct. IAPG members have published numerous books and articles in peer reviewed international journals, and organized scientific sessions to bring geoethics at the most important geoscience conferences. Geoethical issues have been included in the European project ENVRI-Plus, dedicated to the environmental and solid Earth research infrastructures.
Moreover, the most prestigious geoscience organizations around the world now recognize geoethics as an important issue that warrants attention.
This success was confirmed by the high quality of contents and the large participation of scientists in the 6 technical sessions and single panel session on geoethics organized by IAPG at the 35th IGC – International Geological Congress, held in 2016 in Cape Town (South Africa), with the cooperative work of different geoscience organizations (IUGS-TGGP – Task Group on Global Geoscience Professionalism; GSL - Geological Society
of London; EFG - European Federation of Geologists; EGS -
EuroGeoSurveys; AGI – American Geosciences Institute; AGU – American Geophysical Union, and AAWG – African Association of Women in Geosciences).
IAPG considers the 35th IGC the scientific event that opened a new phase for Geoethics and for the Association. In order to celebrate this passage, the IAPG has produced the "Cape Town Statement on Geoethics" (CTSG), a document recognized as the result of an international effort to focus the attention of geoscientists on the development of shared policies, guidelines, strategies and tools, with the long-range goal of fostering the regular adoption of ethical values and practices in the geoscience community. The final document (available at
http://www.geoethics.org/ctsg) sums the values, concepts, and contents developed in the first 4-year activity of IAPG, giving a perspective for the future development of geoethics.
This presentation illustrates the content of the “Cape Town Statement on Geoethics”, that is now supported officially by several geoscience organizations.

- by Giuseppe Di Capua
- •
- Earth Sciences, Geology, Ethics, Applied Ethics
- by Ziya Aydi
- •
- Authenticity, Intentionality, Knowledge, Memory
- by Seyed Sahand Mohammadi Ziabari
- •
- Research Integrity
- by Alessandra Ferrari
- •
- Research Integrity
- by Arthur Caplan
- •
- Research Ethics, Research Misconduct, Research Integrity

Prieß-Buchheit, Julia, Arja R. Aro, Iliyana Kuzmova, Dirk Lanzerath, Pavel Stoev, Nicolaus Wilder (2019). Rotatory role-playing and role-models to enhance the research integrity culture. European Union (EU) Horizon 2020 Path2Integrity... more

Prieß-Buchheit, Julia, Arja R. Aro, Iliyana Kuzmova, Dirk Lanzerath, Pavel Stoev, Nicolaus Wilder (2019).
Rotatory role-playing and role-models to enhance the research integrity culture. European Union (EU) Horizon
2020 Path2Integrity project, Grant agreement No 824488. http://www.path2integrity.eu.

- by Julia Prieß-Buchheit and +1
- •
- Education, Didactics, Evaluation, Research Integrity

An interplay of lacking methodological and research integrity, joined by inadequate research training and Management skills might be at the heart of disappointing research achieve-ments in The Netherlands. Against the backdrop of this disheartening situation two frame-works are compared to one another – The Scientific spirit and the Dutch reviewed ethical code Adviesrapport Commissie Verkenning Herziening Gedragscode Wetenschapsbeoefe-ning (2016). The latter is bound to education and research, while the former extends beyond education and research, and is meant to be a way of life, involving both the application of methodology and ethics. Meanwhile the Dutch reviewed ethical code shows a great deal of overlap with The Scientific spirit – its predecessor so to say.
To solve the research crises which is affecting society negatively I propose that the entire Dutch educational system is overhauled, toward an all-encompassing research attitude which satisfies The Scientific spirit considering the nature of different research traditions that are not considered in The Scientific spirit.

- by Kwasi Koorndijk
- •
- Organizational Behavior, Management, History, Anthropology
- by Jorge L Maguiña
- •
- Ethics, Applied Ethics, Bioethics, Research Misconduct

There is a mounting worry about erroneous and outright fraudulent research that gets published in the scientific literature. Although peer review's ability to filter out such publications is contentious, several peer review innovations attempt to do just that. However, there is very little systematic evidence documenting the ability of different review procedures to flag problematic publications. In this article, we use survey data on peer review in a wide range of journals to compare the retraction rates of specific review procedures, using the Retraction Watch database. We were able to identify which peer review procedures were used since 2000 for 361 journals, publishing a total of 833,172 articles, of which 670 were retracted. After addressing the dual character of retractions, signalling both a failure to identify problems prior to publication, but also the willingness to correct mistakes, we empirically assess review procedures. With considerable conceptual caveats, we were able to identify peer review procedures that seem able to detect problematic research better than others. Results were verified for disciplinary differences and variation between reasons for retraction. This leads to informed recommendations for journal editors about strengths and weaknesses of specific peer review procedures, allowing them to select review procedures that address issues most relevant to their field.

- by Serge Horbach
- •
- Peer Review, Research Integrity, Retraction
- by Annelies Moors and +1
- •
- Research Ethics, Autoethnography, Ethnographic Fieldwork (Anthropology), Qualitative Methodology (Sociology)

The Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (VU) is an internationally renowned research university. Since its founding in 1880 interdisciplinary research has been leading in its education. The university consists of nine faculties with teaching facilities for 24.000 students. With over 140 English-taught Bachelor's and Master's programmes, the university offers a wide range of study options. The campus is a centrally located hub where people easily feel at home. WWW.VU.NL/WINTERSCHOOL | GRADUATEWINTERSCHOOL@VU.NL | +31 20 59 82944 RESEARCH INTEGRITY: HOW TO CONDUCT RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH IN A RAPIDLY CHANGING RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT 3 ECTS | MASTER, PHD & PROFESSIONALS 500-800 ONLINE • know what the current status of academic research requires; • know whether there is a replicability crisis and what remedies are coined to improve science; • apply the code of conduct for research integrity within student's own work; • reflect on research integrity dilemmas within specific fields; • know how one can spot unprofessional conduct of research; • know what research integrity will look like in the future and how experts expect academic research to be organized. € 11-15 JANUARY 2021 The integrity of scientific research has received an increase in attention in recent years. Researchers, policy makers, politicians as well as universities at large have raised concerns about the way academic research is organized and about the influence of the research culture on research practice. Academia is currently facing a challenging set of problems: first, the prevalence of research misbehaviour was found higher than desirable; second, the reproducibility crisis and the factors contributing to the impossibility to replicate a large set of research results; and third, the issue of research waste, which is mainly due to poor reporting and the failure to publish negative or ambiguous results. By making PhD candidates or master students who are preparing for a career in research aware of these issues, and by training them in the required skills and tools needed to address these issues, we prepare them to remain responsible researchers in an environment that might lure them into sloppy science, even unintentionally. This course reviews research integrity in academia in both the conduct of science, the evaluation of science, the peer review system and in the academic community at large. It is a highly interactive course where participants engage with different issues such as replication, the peer review crisis, and what a responsible research culture looks like. We also look into the future of academia and specifically open science. APPLICATION DEADLINES & DISCOUNTS Apply before the 1st of December 2020. Early Bird Discount of €50 valid until the 1st of October 2020. Visit our website for more information. LEARNING OBJECTIVES At the end of the course, students will be able to:

This paper provide a qualitative analysis on promoting research governance in the higher learning institutions. The purpose of this paper is to analyse importance of research integrity and ethical practices in higher learning institutions qualitatively for the implementation of good governance in research practices. Qualitative research is utilized to discover the deeper associations that underlie individual researcher's approach for research integrity avoid any misconduct. Comments on qualitative questions asked to university lecturers were coded systematically. The research quantify the qualitative interview data through data query, and cross tabulation. To synthesize the findings, thematic analysis was used which were interpreted within the study context of promoting governance, research integrity and ethical practices. This paper also provide recommendations for additional research and further discussions on these issues. The thematic findings confirmed that researchers need to maintain high standard of research integrity together with appropriate, ethical, legal and obligations ensuring highest standards of rigor to support research integrity.

- by Shrikant Panigrahi and +1
- •
- Research Methodology, Corporate Governance, Qualitative Research, Research Integrity
- by Sami Faltas
- •
- Business Ethics, Law, Criminal Law, International Relations

The paper analyses the trust role in the communication of scientific (biomedical in particular) research, focusing on the rhetorical notion of ethos. Firstly, the theoretical framework is outlined (e.g. philosophical, anthropological or "deep" rhetoric) and key concepts are defined. Then, the text investigates the topics of science persuasiveness and trust as a mean of persuasion. Peculiarities of the scientific ethos are analysed, including especially the phenomenon of "enunciative effacement" (effacement énconciatif) and the characteristics of a reader-friendly style, referring to the area of science communication and its ethics, which has a profound impact on the public perception of scientific research and on citizens' behaviours. La nozione di ethos rappresenta uno degli elementi chiave della retorica, da Aristotele in poi. In tale concetto è possibile distinguere almeno tre aspetti principali: l'immagine di sé costruita dall'oratore nel discorso; l'immagine che egli si fa del proprio uditorio; la credibilità che gli ascoltatori gli attribuiscono. 1 La dimensione dell'ethos ha, pertanto, a che vedere con i modi in cui la fiducia, la credibilità, l'autorevolezza, l'expertise incidono sulla persuasività di un discorso. Il presente contributo intende proporre una riflessione in merito al ruolo dell'ethos nella comunicazione della ricerca scientifica, soprattutto su questioni riguardanti la salute. Sebbene l'«ethos della scienza» sia stato ampiamente discusso nel contesto sociologico, come quel complesso di valori e norme a cui si ritiene impegnato anche emotivamente l'uomo di scienza, 2 l'analisi qui condotta si avvale in modo specifico degli strumenti e dell'apparato concettuale della retorica per affrontare il tema della persuasività della comunicazione scientifica. 3 Il peculiare ruolo dell'ethos di chi parla o scrive nel rendere un discorso scientifico degno di fiducia, e in tal senso persuasivo, viene considerato nell'ottica della promozione di una maggiore consapevolezza sulle responsabilità dei 1 Cfr. Amossy 1999; Zagarella 2015. 2 Basti pensare al contributo di Merton (2000). 3 Alcuni dei temi trattati nel presente articolo sono stati discussi in Zagarella 2016.

- by Roberta Martina Zagarella
- •
- Research Integrity, Retorica, Etica, Filosofia Del Linguaggio

Moral, social, political, and other "nonepistemic" values can lead to bias in science, from prioritizing certain topics over others to the rationalization of questionable research practices. Such values might seem particularly common or powerful in the social sciences, given their subject matter. However, I argue first that the well-documented phenomenon of motivated reasoning provides a useful framework for understanding when values guide scientific inquiry (in pernicious or productive ways). Second, this analysis reveals a parity thesis: values influence the social and natural sciences about equally, particularly because both are so prominently affected by desires for social credit and status, including recognition and career advancement. Ultimately, bias in natural and social science is both natural and social-that is, a part of human nature and considerably motivated by a concern for social status (and its maintenance). Whether the pervasive influence of values is inimical to the sciences is a separate question. Word count: 9,314 excluding references and abstract (11,198 total)

- by Joshua May
- •
- Philosophy of Science, Rationalization, Research Integrity, Conflicts of interest
- by Enrico Bucci
- •
- Bibliometrics, Research Integrity, Scientific Fraud, Retractions

This paper argues that the “scientific self” -- i.e., the historically contingent sets of habits, dispositions, virtues, or competencies that scientists consider important for the pursuit of scientific research -- is an embodied articulation of what scientists at a given time and place regard as good, responsible research. With examples from across the scientific spectrum (sociology, biology, history), the paper shows, more specifically, that the scientific self offers us a glimpse of research ethics in non-codified form -- a form of ethics that is less stable, more contested, and therefore at least as interesting as, say, the Nuremberg Code or the Declaration of Helsinki to the extent that it translates abstract ethical demands into concrete human character traits.

- by Herman Paul
- •
- History, Intellectual History, History of Ideas, Research Ethics

Institutional review boards (IRBs) have become beleaguered by a growth in responsibilities related to research oversight in the past several decades. A number of regulatory bodies have appeared in response to these novel and complex responsibilities, seeking to respond to among other issues, conflicts of interest, new technologies, and the potential misuse of research findings. Here, we examine several examples of these novel regulatory bodies as well as a number of concerns related to them that have been largely unacknowledged. Evidence suggests that there can be disharmony and conflicts between these regulatory bodies and IRBs, a lack of clarity with regard to their roles and responsibilities, as well as shortcomings within these entities that, at times, look a lot like the worries that have long been raised in relation to IRBs. We offer a brief discussion of how some of these concerns might be ameliorated, either through a significant restructuring of the system of research oversight, or perhaps through smaller changes to these regulatory bodies.

- by Arthur Caplan and +1
- •
- Medical and Research ethics, IRB Regulations, Research Integrity

Skills in writing papers for scientific journals have become crucial across academia, and universities everywhere are arranging writing courses in their ph. d programs. During two decades of teaching such courses I have witnessed how research integrity has emerged from a non-issue to an increasingly important topic. This contribution to a symposium on research integrity at The Royal Society of Arts and Sciences in Gothenburg in 2017 analyzes these content changes. The first section deals with the practice-oriented issues at the center during the first years: how to write and to manage the review process. The next section presents the historical development of scientific communication, why publishing in peer-reviewed journals now occupies such a central place, and the functions fulfilled by this form of publishing. Section three focuses on ethics and integrity, and presents recent research on retractions and editorial experiences in the fields of management, organization and economics. The final section discusses the problems of fragmented control in modern academia and the asymmetry between rapid entry and exceedingly slow exit in leading journals. The paper concludes with suggesting that academia needs to study the drug-fighting institutions in international sports to improve its capacity to expose and sanction unethical behavior.

- by Christian Berggren
- •
- Academic Writing, Research Writing, Scientific publishing, Academic Ethics