Latest revision as of 14:03, 5 August 2021

Resources

Cases

The Epistemic Integrity of Scientific Research

What is this about?

This case defines the concept of epistemic integrity, which can be used to explain research integrity. The epistemic integrity of an experiment is inversely proportional to the deceptiveness of the results of the given experiment. For instance, the more deceptive the outcomes of an experiment are phrased, the lower the epistemic integrity of the practice is.

Why is this important?

To promote research integrity, it is important that one completely grasps the concept of research integrity and that one can explain it. Various explications and definitions of research integrity have been offered over the years. However, none of these explications did fully meet the four criteria for a sufficient explication, as outlined by Rudolf Carnap.^[1] Therefore, this article comes up with an explication of research integrity that fully adheres to these principles and enables more people to understand research integrity. This explication may be used to test, explain, and increase the epistemic integrity of future scientific research.

↑ Carnap, R. (1950). Logical foundation of probability. London: Routledge and Keegan Paul.

For whom is this important?

Researchers

Other information

Who

Merck & Co

When

2001

Virtues & Values

Good Practices & Misconduct

Research Area

Clinical medicine

[1] Carnap, R. (1950). Logical foundation of probability. London: Routledge and Keegan Paul.

[1]

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 |Resource Type=Cases
 |Title=The Epistemic Integrity of Scientific Research
-|Is About=This case describes a concept of epistemic integrity that is based on the property of deceptiveness, and argues that this concept does meet Carnap’s four requirements of explication. To illustrate and support their claims they use several examples from scientific practice, mainly from biomedical research<ref>De Winter, Jan, and Laszlo Kosolosky. "The epistemic integrity of scientific research." ''Science and Engineering Ethics'' 19.3 (2013): 757-774.</ref>. This is a factual case.
+|Is About=This case defines the concept of epistemic integrity, which can be used to explain research integrity. The epistemic integrity of an experiment is inversely proportional to the deceptiveness of the results of the given experiment. For instance, the more deceptive the outcomes of an experiment are phrased, the lower the epistemic integrity of the practice is.
 <references />
-|Important Because=We live in a world in which scientific expertise and its epistemic authority become more important. On the other hand, the financial interests in research, which could potentially corrupt science, are increasing. Due to these two tendencies, a concern for the integrity of scientific research becomes increasingly vital<ref>De Winter, Jan, and Laszlo Kosolosky. "The epistemic integrity of scientific research." ''Science and Engineering Ethics'' 19.3 (2013): 757-774.</ref>.
+|Important Because=To promote research integrity, it is important that one completely grasps the concept of research integrity and that one can explain it. Various explications and definitions of research integrity have been offered over the years. However, none of these explications did fully meet the four criteria for a sufficient explication, as outlined by Rudolf Carnap.<ref>Carnap, R. (1950). ''Logical foundation of probability''. London: Routledge and Keegan Paul.</ref> Therefore, this article comes up with an explication of research integrity that fully adheres to these principles and enables more people to understand research integrity. This explication may be used to test, explain, and increase the epistemic integrity of future scientific research.
 <references />
 |Important For=Researchers

Difference between revisions of "Resource:606c4f6b-253b-475e-8ee3-d2762e65bdbe"