Addressing research integrity challenges: from penalising individual perpetrators to fostering research ecosystem quality care

被引:19
作者
Zwart, Hub [1 ]
ter Meulen, Ruud [2 ]
机构
[1] Erasmus Univ, Erasmus Sch Philosophy, POB 1738, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Univ Bristol, Off G-04a,Canynge Hall,39 Whatley Rd, Bristol BS8 2PS, Avon, England
基金
欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词
Research integrity; Scientific misconduct; Research performing Organisations; Research ethics;
D O I
10.1186/s40504-019-0093-6
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Concern for and interest in research integrity has increased significantly during recent decades, both in academic and in policy discourse. Both in terms of diagnostics and in terms of therapy, the tendency in integrity discourse has been to focus on strategies of individualisation (detecting and punishing individual deviance). Other contributions to the integrity debate, however, focus more explicitly on environmental factors, e.g. on the quality and resilience of research ecosystems, on institutional rather than individual responsibilities, and on the quality of the research culture. One example of this is the Bonn PRINTEGER Statement. This editorial to the LSSP thematic series (article collection) entitled Addressing integrity challenges in research: the institutional dimension invites authors to contribute to the research integrity debate. Notably, we are interested in submissions addressing issues such as institutional responsibilities, changes in the research climate, duties of research managers and research performing or research funding organisations (RPOs and RFOs) as well as new approaches to integrity education.
引用
收藏
页数:5
相关论文
共 8 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2017, The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity
  • [2] Scientific misconduct and science ethics: a case study based approach
    Consoli, Luca
    [J]. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS, 2006, 12 (03) : 533 - 541
  • [3] Working with Research Integrity-Guidance for Research Performing Organisations: The Bonn PRINTEGER Statement
    Forsberg, Ellen-Marie
    Anthun, Frank O.
    Bailey, Sharon
    Birchley, Giles
    Bout, Henriette
    Casonato, Carlo
    Fuster, Gloria Gonzalez
    Heinrichs, Bert
    Horbach, Serge
    Jacobsen, Ingrid Skjaeggestad
    Janssen, Jacques
    Kaiser, Matthias
    Lerouge, Inge
    van der Meulen, Barend
    de Rijcke, Sarah
    Saretzki, Thomas
    Sutrop, Margit
    Tazewell, Marta
    Varantola, Krista
    Vie, Knut Jorgen
    Zwart, Hub
    Zoeller, Mira
    [J]. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS, 2018, 24 (04) : 1023 - 1034
  • [4] South Korean policy failure and the Hwang debacle
    Gottweis, H
    Triendl, R
    [J]. NATURE BIOTECHNOLOGY, 2006, 24 (02) : 141 - 143
  • [5] Promoting Virtue or Punishing Fraud: Mapping Contrasts in the Language of 'Scientific Integrity'
    Horbach, S. P. J. M.
    Halffman, W.
    [J]. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS, 2017, 23 (06) : 1461 - 1485
  • [6] Personality Traits Are Associated with Research Misbehavior in Dutch Scientists: A Cross-Sectional Study
    Tijdink, Joeri K.
    Bouter, Lex M.
    Veldkamp, Coosje L. S.
    van de Ven, Peter M.
    Wicherts, Jelte M.
    Smulders, Yvo M.
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2016, 11 (09):
  • [7] Zwart H, 2017, LIB ETHICS APPL PHIL, V36
  • [8] Challenges of Macro-ethics: Bioethics and the Transformation of Knowledge Production
    Zwart, Hub
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BIOETHICAL INQUIRY, 2008, 5 (04) : 283 - 293