Difference between revisions of "Resource:A9e1f468-b56b-4ae5-91fe-20024d43e154"

From The Embassy of Good Science
Line 11: Line 11:
 
}}
 
}}
 
{{Related To
 
{{Related To
 +
|Related To Resource=Resource:D303f2ff-021f-4b2e-a145-f7b441e35830;Resource:226c89f1-a061-4bb0-8ec4-79583de2ddf0
 
|Related To Theme=Theme:28a0859b-9e52-4af4-97f0-b0f8eeac1f1c
 
|Related To Theme=Theme:28a0859b-9e52-4af4-97f0-b0f8eeac1f1c
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 09:35, 7 August 2020

Cases

Scientific Misconduct at an Elite Medical Institute: The Role of Competing Institutional Logics and Fragmented Control

What is this about?

This paper builds on the concepts of competing logics and institutional fields to analyze a serious case of medical and scientific misconduct at a leading research institute, Karolinska in Sweden, home to the Nobel Prize in Medicine[1]. This is a factual case.

  1. Berggren, Christian, and Solmaz Filiz Karabag. "Scientific misconduct at an elite medical institute: The role of competing institutional logics and fragmented control." Research Policy 48.2 (2019): 428-443.

Why is this important?

The incidence of revealed fraud and dishonesty in academia is on the rise, and so is the number of studies seeking to explain scientific misconduct[1].
  1. Berggren, Christian, and Solmaz Filiz Karabag. "Scientific misconduct at an elite medical institute: The role of competing institutional logics and fragmented control." Research Policy 48.2 (2019): 428-443.

For whom is this important?

Other information

When
Where
Good Practices & Misconduct
Research Area
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
5.1.6