Literature DB >> 16501644

Responsible conduct in research.

Pieter J D Drenth1.   

Abstract

Science is not taken for granted any longer. Society, politics and the media pose critical questions tending to censorship or at least control of science. How does science respond? It cannot exist and develop without freedom, but this does not mean freedom to amass knowledge and apply technological applications at any price and without restrictions. Science should be autonomous, but is not value-free. A distinction is made between external and internal social/ethical problems. The former refer to questions of the social/ethical context and consequences of scientific research, and the latter to the rules of 'good practice' and scientific integrity. The role of academies of science, and of associations of such academies (e.g. All European Academies (ALLEA)) in developing codes of good scientific practice and fostering a proper sense of scientific values and standards is further discussed.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16501644     DOI: 10.1007/pl00022265

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics        ISSN: 1353-3452            Impact factor:   3.525


  2 in total

1.  International science and fair-play practices.

Authors:  Pieter J D Drenth
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 3.525

2.  The messenger under attack -- intimidation of researchers by special-interest groups.

Authors:  R A Deyo; B M Psaty; G Simon; E H Wagner; G S Omenn
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1997-04-17       Impact factor: 91.245

  2 in total
  5 in total

1.  Conference summary: 'The responsible conduct of basic and clinical research'.

Authors:  Raymond E Spier
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.525

2.  Making researchers responsible: attributions of responsibility and ambiguous notions of culture in research codes of conduct.

Authors:  Govert Valkenburg; Guus Dix; Joeri Tijdink; Sarah de Rijcke
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2020-07-07       Impact factor: 2.652

3.  The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications.

Authors:  S P J M Horbach; W Halffman
Journal:  Scientometrics       Date:  2018-11-29       Impact factor: 3.238

4.  Expanding Research Integrity: A Cultural-Practice Perspective.

Authors:  Govert Valkenburg; Guus Dix; Joeri Tijdink; Sarah de Rijcke
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2021-02-09       Impact factor: 3.525

5.  Can research integrity prevail in the market? Lessons from commissioned research organizations.

Authors:  Knut Jørgen Vie
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 3.057

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.