Scientific Integrity Principles and Best Practices: Recommendations from a Scientific Integrity Consortium

被引:0
|
作者
Alison Kretser
Delia Murphy
Stefano Bertuzzi
Todd Abraham
David B. Allison
Kathryn J. Boor
Johanna Dwyer
Andrea Grantham
Linda J. Harris
Rachelle Hollander
Chavonda Jacobs-Young
Sarah Rovito
Dorothea Vafiadis
Catherine Woteki
Jessica Wyndham
Rickey Yada
机构
[1] ILSI North America,U.S. Department of Agriculture
[2] American Society for Microbiology,Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition
[3] Formerly of the ILSI Global Board of Trustees,undefined
[4] Indiana University School of Public Health,undefined
[5] Cornell University,undefined
[6] Tufts Medical Center,undefined
[7] Canadian Nutrition Society,undefined
[8] International Association for Food Protection,undefined
[9] University of California,undefined
[10] Formerly of The National Academies of Sciences,undefined
[11] Engineering,undefined
[12] and Medicine,undefined
[13] The National Academy of Engineering,undefined
[14] Center for Engineering Ethics and Society,undefined
[15] Agricultural Research Service,undefined
[16] Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities,undefined
[17] American Heart Association,undefined
[18] Iowa State University (Formerly of the U.S. Department of Agriculture,undefined
[19] Research,undefined
[20] Education,undefined
[21] and Economics),undefined
[22] American Association for the Advancement of Science,undefined
[23] University of British Columbia,undefined
[24] Kellan,undefined
[25] National Council on Aging,undefined
来源
Science and Engineering Ethics | 2019年 / 25卷
关键词
Culture of integrity; Responsible conduct of research (RCR); Quality of research; Open science; Research misconduct; Detrimental research practices;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
A Scientific Integrity Consortium developed a set of recommended principles and best practices that can be used broadly across scientific disciplines as a mechanism for consensus on scientific integrity standards and to better equip scientists to operate in a rapidly changing research environment. The two principles that represent the umbrella under which scientific processes should operate are as follows: (1) Foster a culture of integrity in the scientific process. (2) Evidence-based policy interests may have legitimate roles to play in influencing aspects of the research process, but those roles should not interfere with scientific integrity. The nine best practices for instilling scientific integrity in the implementation of these two overarching principles are (1) Require universal training in robust scientific methods, in the use of appropriate experimental design and statistics, and in responsible research practices for scientists at all levels, with the training content regularly updated and presented by qualified scientists. (2) Strengthen scientific integrity oversight and processes throughout the research continuum with a focus on training in ethics and conduct. (3) Encourage reproducibility of research through transparency. (4) Strive to establish open science as the standard operating procedure throughout the scientific enterprise. (5) Develop and implement educational tools to teach communication skills that uphold scientific integrity. (6) Strive to identify ways to further strengthen the peer review process. (7) Encourage scientific journals to publish unanticipated findings that meet standards of quality and scientific integrity. (8) Seek harmonization and implementation among journals of rapid, consistent, and transparent processes for correction and/or retraction of published papers. (9) Design rigorous and comprehensive evaluation criteria that recognize and reward the highest standards of integrity in scientific research.
引用
收藏
页码:327 / 355
页数:28
相关论文
共 26 条
  • [1] Scientific Integrity Principles and Best Practices: Recommendations from a Scientific Integrity Consortium
    Kretser, Alison
    Murphy, Delia
    Bertuzzi, Stefano
    Abraham, Todd
    Allison, David B.
    Boor, Kathryn J.
    Dwyer, Johanna
    Grantham, Andrea
    Harris, Linda J.
    Hollander, Rachelle
    Jacobs-Young, Chavonda
    Rovito, Sarah
    Vafiadis, Dorothea
    Woteki, Catherine
    Wyndham, Jessica
    Yada, Rickey
    SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS, 2019, 25 (02) : 327 - 355
  • [2] Scientific integrity in research methods
    Schoenherr, Jordan R.
    FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY, 2015, 6
  • [3] Scientific integrity: The new challenge for science and research
    Leger, Marc
    ANESTHESIE & REANIMATION, 2023, 9 (5-6): : 428 - 433
  • [4] Aligning Scientific Values and Research Integrity: A Study of Researchers’ Perceptions and Practices in Four Countries
    Dan Li
    Le Thu Mach
    Gustaaf Cornelis
    Science and Engineering Ethics, 31 (3)
  • [5] Scientific integrity: critical issues in environmental health research
    Domenico Franco Merlo
    Kirsi Vahakangas
    Lisbeth E Knudsen
    Environmental Health, 7
  • [6] Evaluation of Pharmacy Students' Knowledge and Perception of Scientific Integrity
    Ababneh, Rawan A.
    Alzoubi, Karem H.
    Ababneh, Mera A.
    EDUCATION SCIENCES, 2020, 10 (02):
  • [7] The role of scientific associations in promoting research integrity and deterring research misconductCommentary on ‘challenges in studying the effects of scientific societies on research integrity’ (Levine and Iutcovitch)
    Melissa S. Anderson
    Joseph B. Shultz
    Science and Engineering Ethics, 2003, 9 : 269 - 272
  • [8] The role of scientific associations in promoting research integrity and deterring research misconduct - Commentary on 'Challenges in studying the effects of scientific societies on research integrity' (Levine and Iutcovitch)
    Anderson, MS
    Shultz, JB
    SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS, 2003, 9 (02) : 269 - 272
  • [9] Double-blind peer review is detrimental to scientific integrity
    Mebane, Christopher A.
    ENVIRONMENTAL TOXICOLOGY AND CHEMISTRY, 2025, 44 (02) : 318 - 323
  • [10] RETHINKING THE MEANING OF BEING A SCIENTIST - THE ROLE OF SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY BOARDS AND SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT SCIENTIFIC CULTURE
    Werner-Felmayer, Gabriele
    MEDICINE AND LAW, 2010, 29 (03): : 329 - 339