Difference between revisions of "Resource:F68f2226-005e-4321-b2a4-fc541fdf6c8d"
From The Embassy of Good Science
Marc.VanHoof (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Guidelines |Title=Institutional dealing with scientific misconduct |Is About=. |Important For=Researchers }} {{Link |Has Link=http://eruditio.worldac...") |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Resource | {{Resource | ||
| − | |Resource Type= | + | |Resource Type=Other |
|Title=Institutional dealing with scientific misconduct | |Title=Institutional dealing with scientific misconduct | ||
| − | |Is About=. | + | |Is About=In this article three categories of causal factors are distinguished: Deceit as an individual vice, an existing culture of sloppiness and irresponsibility within certain disciplines or institutes, and the pernicious influence of today’s research climate with its pressure for production and the ‘metrification’ of performance and output. Suggestions for dealing with cases of misconduct, resulting from these three distinct views, are presented and discussed. |
| + | |Important Because=The promotion of a culture of scientific integrity and the furthering of responsible research by their employees deserve a high priority within universities and research institutes. Proper disciplinary actions and preventive measures should be based on an analysis of the possible motives and causes underlying such misbehaviour | ||
|Important For=Researchers | |Important For=Researchers | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 8: | Line 9: | ||
|Has Link=http://eruditio.worldacademy.org/files/issue-6/reprints/ej-v1-i6-institutional-dealing-pdrenth-reprint.pdf | |Has Link=http://eruditio.worldacademy.org/files/issue-6/reprints/ej-v1-i6-institutional-dealing-pdrenth-reprint.pdf | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | {{Related To}} | + | {{Related To |
| + | |Related To Resource=Resource:F68f2226-005e-4321-b2a4-fc541fdf6c8d;Resource:45af2d0e-4238-4d3b-8431-9b7682eb9691;Resource:A9e1f468-b56b-4ae5-91fe-20024d43e154 | ||
| + | |Related To Theme=Theme:13ae94da-15d6-426f-8f6e-9134fb57e267;Theme:28a0859b-9e52-4af4-97f0-b0f8eeac1f1c | ||
| + | }} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
| − | |Involves=ALLEA | + | |Involves=ALLEA; Pieter J. D. Drenth |
| + | |Has Timepoint=2015 | ||
| + | |Has Virtue And Value=Reliability | ||
| + | |Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Misconduct; Scientific Misdonduct | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 08:21, 14 August 2020
ResourcesOther
Institutional dealing with scientific misconduct
What is this about?
In this article three categories of causal factors are distinguished: Deceit as an individual vice, an existing culture of sloppiness and irresponsibility within certain disciplines or institutes, and the pernicious influence of today’s research climate with its pressure for production and the ‘metrification’ of performance and output. Suggestions for dealing with cases of misconduct, resulting from these three distinct views, are presented and discussed.
Why is this important?
The promotion of a culture of scientific integrity and the furthering of responsible research by their employees deserve a high priority within universities and research institutes. Proper disciplinary actions and preventive measures should be based on an analysis of the possible motives and causes underlying such misbehaviour
