Difference between revisions of "Resource:F243f440-69e9-44f8-b95a-5e0c2009f700"
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|Resource Type=Cases | |Resource Type=Cases | ||
|Title=Mea Culpa: Scientific Misconduct - perspective of a research ethics board chair | |Title=Mea Culpa: Scientific Misconduct - perspective of a research ethics board chair | ||
| − | |Is About=This is a factual case.<references /> | + | |Is About=This is a factual case. This editorial article offers a short historic overview of scientific misconduct and outlines its various forms. Several recommendations are added to prevent the occurrence of these various forms of (unintentional) scientific misconduct. Importantly, the article stresses that research integrity is not merely concerns the research ethics boards but is important for all those involved in the scientific community.<references /> |
| − | |Important Because=<br /> | + | |Important Because=As described in the article, the incidence of scientific misconduct seems to be increasing. However, not all scientific misconduct is deliberate, but may also result from insufficient training or a lack of knowledge. The overview and recommendations described in this article may aid in the prevention of such accidental scientific misconduct. Moreover, this resource can also help to uncover more intentional forms of scientific misconduct. It is noted in the article that many cases of scientific misconduct are reported by the thoughtful readers of scientific articles. This article may assist readers and other members of the scientific community in the recognition of the various forms of scientific misconduct. Hopefully, it also convinces them of the importance of reporting these cases. <br /> |
<references /> | <references /> | ||
|Important For=Researchers | |Important For=Researchers | ||
Revision as of 17:14, 23 April 2021
ResourcesMea Culpa: Scientific Misconduct - perspective of a research ethics board chair
What is this about?
Why is this important?
As described in the article, the incidence of scientific misconduct seems to be increasing. However, not all scientific misconduct is deliberate, but may also result from insufficient training or a lack of knowledge. The overview and recommendations described in this article may aid in the prevention of such accidental scientific misconduct. Moreover, this resource can also help to uncover more intentional forms of scientific misconduct. It is noted in the article that many cases of scientific misconduct are reported by the thoughtful readers of scientific articles. This article may assist readers and other members of the scientific community in the recognition of the various forms of scientific misconduct. Hopefully, it also convinces them of the importance of reporting these cases.
