Continuous recordings of brain electrical activity were obtained from a group of 176 patients throughout surgical procedures using general anesthesia. Artifact-free data from the 19 electrodes of the International 10/20 System were subjected to quantitative analysis of the electroencephalogram (QEEG). Induction was variously accomplished with etomidate, propofol or thiopental. Anesthesia was maintained throughout the procedures by isoflurane, desflurane or sevoflurane (N = 68), total intravenous anesthesia using propofol (N = 49), or nitrous oxide plus narcotics (N = 59). A set (...) of QEEG measures were found which reversibly displayed high heterogeneity of variance between four states as follows: (1) during induction; (2) just after loss of consciousness (LOC); (3) just before return of consciousness (ROC); (4) just after ROC. Homogeneity of variance across all agents within states was found. Topographic statistical probability images were compared between states. At LOC, power increased in all frequency bands in the power spectrum with the exception of a decrease in gamma activity, and there was a marked anteriorization of power. Additionally, a significant change occurred in hemispheric relationships, with prefrontal and frontal regions of each hemisphere becoming more closely coupled, and anterior and posterior regions on each hemisphere, as well as homologous regions between the two hemispheres, uncoupling. All of these changes reversed upon ROC. Variable resolution electromagnetic tomography (VARETA) was performed to localize salient features of power anteriorization in three dimensions. A common set of neuroanatomical regions appeared to be the locus of the most probable generators of the observed EEG changes. (shrink)

L’être humain est une manière singulière d’être corps, en rapport au monde, en relation avec autrui. Ce style qui constitue sa chair s’exprime dans certaines attitudes typiques marquées par une conjonction, parfois extrême, de passivité et d’activité – dès l’amplitude comme la profondeur de sa perception du monde, dans l’accueil et l’écoute qu’il peut accorder à autrui, dans une posture foncièrement interrogative intriquée avec des dimensions de consentement et de foi. Ces attitudes montrent...

Présente en creux dans les divers modes de structuration de la rhétorique stoïcienne, dans ses définitions mêmes, dans la délimitation de son champ d’application et de ses rapports à la dialectique ainsi qu’à la persuasion, dans la conception de sa vertu stylistique essentielle, la concision, la figure d’Aristote paraît centrale dans la réflexion oratoire menée par les Stoïciens. Elle incarne en effet, sinon un repoussoir, du moins un modèle théorique incontournable par rapport auquel il importe de prendre position. Paradoxalement, l’écart (...) immense qui sépare leurs doctrines rhétoriques respectives atteste, de la part des Stoïciens, une connaissance précise de l’œuvre d’Aristote. (shrink)

Présente le parcours philosophique de Merleau-Ponty tant dans sa formation que dans ses objectifs. Ses références : Descartes, Leibniz, Gabriel Marcel. Ses concepts opératoires : le concret, l'incarnation, l'intentionnalité, les chiasmes.

Merleau-Ponty s’est toujours intéressé aux rapports complexes entre christianisme, philosophie et théologie. Ses écrits, publiés ou inédits, opposent régulièrement « la nouveauté du christianisme » – comme expérience de l’homme, comme attitude religieuse, et jusque dans sa conception de Dieu – à une théologie dite « explicative », qui ne parviendrait pas à penser cette nouveauté, voire la trahirait. Accusée d’importer le Dieu des philosophes, cette théologie expliquerait Dieu et expliquerait par Dieu pour mieux se passer des mystères de l’homme, (...) des dimensions tragiques de sa condition, manquant ainsi paradoxalement une négativité qui est le lieu même où s’ouvre l’attitude religieuse. Dans cette confrontation originale, Merleau-Ponty transpose sa propre lutte contre certains philosophes et mobilise les axes essentiels de sa pensée : ses conceptions de l’homme et de l’être, une anthropologie de la chair perceptive et désirante, une ontologie de l’être inachevé et inépuisable. Merleau-Ponty was always interested in the complex relationship between christianity, philosophy and theology. His writings, published or unpublished, regularly contrast « the novelty of Christianity » — as experience of man, as religious attitude, and including its conception of God — with a so-called « explanatory » theology, which would not manage to think this novelty, might even betray it. Charged with importing the God of the philosophers, this theology would explain God and explain by God in order to bypass the mysteries of man, the tragic dimensions of its condition, thus paradoxically missing a negativity which is the very place where the religious attitude unfolds. In this original confrontation, Merleau-Ponty transposes his own fight against some philosophers and summons the essential axis of his thought : his conceptions of man and being, an anthropology of perceptive and desiring flesh, an ontology of unfinished and inexhaustible being. (shrink)

1. Active passivité La surprise, en tant que telle, implique un « dehors », un événement dans notre relation au monde : elle n’est pas purement immanente à notre vie psychique. Il est impossible de se faire à soi-même une véritable surprise, il est bien difficile de simuler mentalement un effet de surprise. Plus transversal qu’un simple sentiment, le phénomène de la surprise peut solliciter l’ensemble de notre être, à commencer par notre institution corporelle la plus élémentaire. La surprise...

Ce texte prend place dans un travail en cours sur la phénoménologie de la portance, notion au croisement de l’anthropologie et de l’ontologie, aux enjeux cliniques et éthiques nombreux. Les principales formes de portance associées à la reconnaissance sont ici envisagées, à travers les liens profonds qui nouent reconnaître et être porté, reconnaître et porter, mais aussi reconnaître et être reconnu. Accomplissement de la dimension perceptive de l’intelligence, la reconnaissance s’ouvre conjointement à l’existence et au style de l’être perçu, discerne (...) et atteste son unicité, éprouvant ainsi l’une des trois grandes qualités ontologiques de la portance. (shrink)

L'anthropologie de Nicolas Berdiaeff est une formidable protestation face à la déshumanisation. Nicolas Berdiaeff, philosophe russe de confession orthodoxe, a vécu la chute du tsarisme et la révolution russe. Expulsé de son pays, en 1922, pour des raisons idéologiques, il passera le reste de sa vie en France, à Clamart, près de Paris. Sa vie et sa compréhension de l'être humain sont étroitement liées. C'est à juste raison que Pierre Aubert les suit sans les séparer : il commence par (...) une présentation de la vie de Berdiaeff et décrit la genèse de sa vie spirituelle. Il dessine le cadre philosophique de sa pensée et l'influence de Dostoïevski sur sa vision de l'homme. Il expose enfin l'anthropologie issue de cette somme de vécu et de références intellectuelles et spirituelles. Pierre Aubert insiste sur l'intérêt actuel d'un penseur chrétien confronté à l'athéisme, car c'est dans ce contexte que Berdiaeff redéploie le dessein de Dieu concernant l'être humain. Il valorise le thème biblique de l'homme créé à l'image de Dieu, convaincu qu'il est que nous sommes des êtres non seulement physiques mais aussi spirituels. Réagissant contre l'éclatement consécutif à la modernité, il décrit l'être humain dans sa complexité et son désir d'unité, et souligne sa spécificité comme personne. Selon Berdiaeff, la dépersonnalisation de l'être humain est la conséquence de la non-reconnaissance de sa relation et de sa parenté avec Dieu. L'incarnation de Dieu en Jésus Christ l'amène enfin à méditer sur le mystère de la divino-humanité comme humanisation de l'être humain. Avec Pierre Aubert, on découvre ou redécouvre avec bonheur la belle figure de penseur et de témoin que fut Nicolas Berdiaeff. (shrink)

Habermas est un des philosophes contemporains vivants les plus célèbres. Cet héritier de l'Ecole de Francfort a participé aux grandes controverses du XXe siècle, celle opposant Adorno à Popper, mais aussi à la querelle des historiens allemands. L'oeuvre abondante d'Habermas croise morale, sociologie, politique et épistémologie. Isabelle Aubert en découvre la profonde unité dans l'intersubjectivité, cette notion que l'on trouve chez Fichte et Husserl mais qu'Habermas s'est efforcé de détourner. Il ne s'agit pas d'éliminer toute forme de subjectivité mais (...) de déplacer la perspective sur le social en mettant au centre une notion qui appréhende la réalité de sujets situés et en relation. Ce modèle alternatif d'intelligibilité s'effectue sur le mode de la participation au dialogue, de l'échange de paroles et non selon le mode de l'observation entre un pôle de représentation et un environnement extérieur. Ainsi naît une nouvelle anthropologie sociale fonctionnelle, à l'écart du mouvement post-moderne. (shrink)

Cet ouvrage se consacre à une période encore mal connue de l'évolution du philosophe, les années 1945-1951. Pendant cette phase de transition indispensable à la compréhension de la genèse des derniers écrits, Merleau-Ponty commence à se libérer des concepts classiques pour s'acheminer vers deux éléments capitaux de sa pensée: la chair et l'empiétement. A partir du bilan moral et politique de 1945, il fait de l'empiétement une figure de la modernité, et travaille en lui l'alliance singulière de pessimisme et d'optimisme (...) par laquelle il veut traduire sa propre version de l'existentialisme. Dans une complicité significative avec l'onirisme des " psychanalyses " de Bachelard, de la " co-naissance " de Claudel et de l'" amour fou " de Breton, Merleau-Ponty prépare ses propres éléments ontologiques, aux antipodes de l'imaginaire sartrien. (shrink)

Présente le parcours philosophique de Merleau-Ponty tant dans sa formation que dans ses objectifs. Ses références : Descartes, Leibniz, Gabriel Marcel. Ses concepts opératoires : le concret, l'incarnation, l'intentionnalité, les chiasmes.

Premier volet d'une relecture transversale de l'œuvre de Merleau-Ponty à la lumière d'une connaissance d'ensemble de ses inédits, cet ouvrage se consacre à une période encore mal connue de l'évolution du philosophe, les années 1945 ...

Nous examinons ici comment Merleau-Ponty, en lien étroit avec sa conception personnelle de l’être, aborde certaines thématiques frayées par Levinas – désir, transcendance, altérité, responsabilité… Marquée par une grande attention au monde perçu, son ontologie met en valeur la négativité de l’être comme ressort de notre naissance et de notre coexistence. Indéfini et relatif, résistant et porteur, l’être travaille notre chair dans une dialectique de limitation et d’ouverture, jusqu’à nous libérer de l’ambivalence qui entrave nos relations et nos concepts. Riche (...) de virtualités éthiques, cette ontologie se veut opposée à Sartre, se pense incompatible avec Heidegger, et contraste fortement avec Levinas – y compris avec la lecture que celui-ci a pu en faire. (shrink)

Cet article s’intéresse au traitement que réserve Adorno à la philosophie morale de Kant dans la Dialectique négative et dans les cours magistraux qui ont préparé cet ouvrage, Probleme der Moralphilosophie et Zur Lehre von der Geschichte und von der Freiheit. Adorno entretient un rapport ambivalent à la théorie morale de Kant en la considérant à la fois comme grevée de « contradictions internes » et comme la « philosophie morale par excellence ». L’article prend pour fil directeur le reproche (...) majeur qu’adresse Adorno à Kant d’avoir essayé de résoudre l’antinomie de la liberté et de négliger la dialectique de la liberté et de la non-liberté. Après avoir dégagé les déplacements sémantiques opérés par Adorno, il montre comment c’est en se situant par rapport à Kant qu’Adorno renouvelle la réflexion morale. (shrink)

“To see is to imagine. And to imagine, is to see.”Perception and Imaginary in Merleau-PontyMerleau-Ponty accords such a phenomenological and ontological priority to perception that this privilege might lead him to minimize the importance of theimaginary in our relationship with the world. In fact, in the work published during his life, the theme of the imaginary does not occupy a large place, and its conceptual elaboration remains little visible. A reading of his posthumous publications and of his unpublished papers leads (...) to a more subtle landscape, inwhich the philosopher destabilizes our common oppositions between real and imaginary, as well as those between the imaginary and truth. From themanuscripts from the end of the 1940s on, Merleau-Ponty expands his inquiry into perception in two complementary directions: the intuition of a form of coextensivity between perceptive life and imaginary life, but also between perception and expression. These intuitions, never disavowed, would continueto deepen up through the late unpublished ontological works. They find a guiding thread in the contestation of Sartre’s separation between the real andthe imaginary, and they open out onto the outline of a complex link between truth, imagination, and expression. Merleau-Ponty pretended to approve of thework of The Imaginary all that which is actually moving beyond it, in the direction most opposite to this essay’s own aims: “To see is to imagine. And toimagine is to see.” This split with Sartre finds one of its pivots in the phenomenological characterization of vision as a surpassing of the observable, a surpassing that would touch on an essential dimension of being and of truth.“Vedere è immaginare. E immaginare, è vedere”.Percezione e immaginario in Merleau-PontyMerleau-Ponty accorda alla percezione una tale priorità, fenomenologica e ontologica, che questo privilegio potrebbe condurre a minimizzare l’importanzadell’immaginario nel nostro rapporto al mondo. Di fatto, nell’opera pubblicata in vita, il tema dell’immaginario non occupa un grande spazio, e la suaelaborazione concettuale resta poco visibile. La lettura delle pubblicazioni postume e degli inediti conduce a un disegno più sottile, che vede il filosofo destabilizzare le nostre comuni opposizioni fra reale e immaginario così come quelle fra immaginario e verità. A partire dai manoscritti della fine degli anniQuaranta, Merleau-Ponty allarga la sua indagine sulla percezione in due direzioni complementari: verso l’intuizione di una forma di co-estensività fravita percettiva e vita immaginaria, ma altresì fra percezione e espressione. Mai smentite, queste intuizioni vanno approfondendosi fino ai tardi inediti“ontologici”. Esse trovano un filo conduttore nella messa in causa della separazione operata da Sartre fra reale e immaginario, e sfociano nell’abbozzodi un legame complesso fra verità, immaginario e espressione. Merleau-Ponty finge di “ratificare” il lavoro de L’Immaginario, in realtà sorpassandolo nelladirezione il più possibile opposta allo sforzo compiuto da questo stesso saggio: «edere è immaginare. E immaginare è vedere». Questo distanziarsi da Sartretrova uno dei suoi “cardini” nella caratterizzazione fenomenologica della visione come superamento dell’osservabile, un superamento che riguarderebbeuna dimensione essenziale dell’essere come della verità. (shrink)

“To see is to imagine. And to imagine, is to see.”Perception and Imaginary in Merleau-PontyMerleau-Ponty accords such a phenomenological and ontological priority to perception that this privilege might lead him to minimize the importance of theimaginary in our relationship with the world. In fact, in the work published during his life, the theme of the imaginary does not occupy a large place, and its conceptual elaboration remains little visible. A reading of his posthumous publications and of his unpublished papers leads (...) to a more subtle landscape, inwhich the philosopher destabilizes our common oppositions between real and imaginary, as well as those between the imaginary and truth. From themanuscripts from the end of the 1940s on, Merleau-Ponty expands his inquiry into perception in two complementary directions: the intuition of a form of coextensivity between perceptive life and imaginary life, but also between perception and expression. These intuitions, never disavowed, would continueto deepen up through the late unpublished ontological works. They find a guiding thread in the contestation of Sartre’s separation between the real andthe imaginary, and they open out onto the outline of a complex link between truth, imagination, and expression. Merleau-Ponty pretended to approve of thework of The Imaginary all that which is actually moving beyond it, in the direction most opposite to this essay’s own aims: “To see is to imagine. And toimagine is to see.” This split with Sartre finds one of its pivots in the phenomenological characterization of vision as a surpassing of the observable, a surpassing that would touch on an essential dimension of being and of truth.“Vedere è immaginare. E immaginare, è vedere”.Percezione e immaginario in Merleau-PontyMerleau-Ponty accorda alla percezione una tale priorità, fenomenologica e ontologica, che questo privilegio potrebbe condurre a minimizzare l’importanzadell’immaginario nel nostro rapporto al mondo. Di fatto, nell’opera pubblicata in vita, il tema dell’immaginario non occupa un grande spazio, e la suaelaborazione concettuale resta poco visibile. La lettura delle pubblicazioni postume e degli inediti conduce a un disegno più sottile, che vede il filosofo destabilizzare le nostre comuni opposizioni fra reale e immaginario così come quelle fra immaginario e verità. A partire dai manoscritti della fine degli anniQuaranta, Merleau-Ponty allarga la sua indagine sulla percezione in due direzioni complementari: verso l’intuizione di una forma di co-estensività fravita percettiva e vita immaginaria, ma altresì fra percezione e espressione. Mai smentite, queste intuizioni vanno approfondendosi fino ai tardi inediti“ontologici”. Esse trovano un filo conduttore nella messa in causa della separazione operata da Sartre fra reale e immaginario, e sfociano nell’abbozzodi un legame complesso fra verità, immaginario e espressione. Merleau-Ponty finge di “ratificare” il lavoro de L’Immaginario, in realtà sorpassandolo nelladirezione il più possibile opposta allo sforzo compiuto da questo stesso saggio: «edere è immaginare. E immaginare è vedere». Questo distanziarsi da Sartretrova uno dei suoi “cardini” nella caratterizzazione fenomenologica della visione come superamento dell’osservabile, un superamento che riguarderebbeuna dimensione essenziale dell’essere come della verità. (shrink)

Jürgen Habermas, représentant majeur de l'Ecole de Francfort, est devenu un auteur classique mais son oeuvre complexe et multiforme, composée d'une cinquantaine d'ouvrages et d'un millier d'articles, continue d'être mal identifiée. Comment saisir la diversité de ses intérêts, des théories de l'action et du langage à la morale et au droit? C'est aussi un acteur, qui intervient régulièrement dans la presse et les débats publics. Comment articuler ces prises de position avec ses travaux proprement théoriques? Dialogues avec Jürgen Habermas, issu (...) d'un colloque international, offre un panorama complet du parcours intellectuel de Habermas, depuis ses premiers écrits jusqu'aux plus récents. L'espace public, l'agir communicationnel, la modernité, la démocratie, l'autonomie, les intérêts de connaissance, etc. sont ici discutés. Plus largement, c'est l'actualité même de sa pensée qui est soulignée et interrogée à propos de thèmes qui font débat : les effets du droit sur la société, la compréhension que l'on peut avoir des crises du capitalisme, ou encore le rapport complexe de la modernité aux religions. Cet ouvrage comprend deux textes inédits du philosophe, un texte d'ouverture sur l'Europe et un texte de clôture où il répond aux intervenants. (shrink)

This article discusses some of the theses put forward by Catherine Colliot-Thélène in her latest book, Le commun de la liberté (2022). After a brief reminder of the links of continuity between the latter and La démocratie sans “demos” (2011), concerning in particular the central question, in both books, of subjective rights, I turn to the author’s treatment of the themes of property and exclusion. With regard to property, whose meaning I seek to determine in the book, it is the (...) joint, paradoxical and ultimately fruitful use of Kant’s and Marx’s theories that is examined here. According to Colliot-Thélène, the major problem of contemporary democracies is exclusion due to the dispossession or absence of property, which defies their universalist principles: I underline the originality of her approach in terms of rights, and suggest some extensions that sociological and ethnological literature can provide to it. (shrink)

“To see is to imagine. And to imagine, is to see.”Perception and Imaginary in Merleau-PontyMerleau-Ponty accords such a phenomenological and ontological priority to perception that this privilege might lead him to minimize the importance of theimaginary in our relationship with the world. In fact, in the work published during his life, the theme of the imaginary does not occupy a large place, and its conceptual elaboration remains little visible. A reading of his posthumous publications and of his unpublished papers leads (...) to a more subtle landscape, inwhich the philosopher destabilizes our common oppositions between real and imaginary, as well as those between the imaginary and truth. From themanuscripts from the end of the 1940s on, Merleau-Ponty expands his inquiry into perception in two complementary directions: the intuition of a form of coextensivity between perceptive life and imaginary life, but also between perception and expression. These intuitions, never disavowed, would continueto deepen up through the late unpublished ontological works. They find a guiding thread in the contestation of Sartre’s separation between the real andthe imaginary, and they open out onto the outline of a complex link between truth, imagination, and expression. Merleau-Ponty pretended to approve of thework of The Imaginary all that which is actually moving beyond it, in the direction most opposite to this essay’s own aims: “To see is to imagine. And toimagine is to see.” This split with Sartre finds one of its pivots in the phenomenological characterization of vision as a surpassing of the observable, a surpassing that would touch on an essential dimension of being and of truth.“Vedere è immaginare. E immaginare, è vedere”.Percezione e immaginario in Merleau-PontyMerleau-Ponty accorda alla percezione una tale priorità, fenomenologica e ontologica, che questo privilegio potrebbe condurre a minimizzare l’importanzadell’immaginario nel nostro rapporto al mondo. Di fatto, nell’opera pubblicata in vita, il tema dell’immaginario non occupa un grande spazio, e la suaelaborazione concettuale resta poco visibile. La lettura delle pubblicazioni postume e degli inediti conduce a un disegno più sottile, che vede il filosofo destabilizzare le nostre comuni opposizioni fra reale e immaginario così come quelle fra immaginario e verità. A partire dai manoscritti della fine degli anniQuaranta, Merleau-Ponty allarga la sua indagine sulla percezione in due direzioni complementari: verso l’intuizione di una forma di co-estensività fravita percettiva e vita immaginaria, ma altresì fra percezione e espressione. Mai smentite, queste intuizioni vanno approfondendosi fino ai tardi inediti“ontologici”. Esse trovano un filo conduttore nella messa in causa della separazione operata da Sartre fra reale e immaginario, e sfociano nell’abbozzodi un legame complesso fra verità, immaginario e espressione. Merleau-Ponty finge di “ratificare” il lavoro de L’Immaginario, in realtà sorpassandolo nelladirezione il più possibile opposta allo sforzo compiuto da questo stesso saggio: «edere è immaginare. E immaginare è vedere». Questo distanziarsi da Sartretrova uno dei suoi “cardini” nella caratterizzazione fenomenologica della visione come superamento dell’osservabile, un superamento che riguarderebbeuna dimensione essenziale dell’essere come della verità. (shrink)

An edition of two manuscript essays found in the family archives of the descendants of the painter and writer Eugène Fromentin. These unpublished essays were submitted in 1840 by their author, Albert Aubert, to Fromentin and his friend Paul Bataillard, for comment and in part response to a question which they had posed, concerning the importance of ambition as a prerequisite for happiness. Les deux essais, publiés ici pour la première fois, datent de mars 1840. Leur auteur, Albert (...) class='Hi'>Aubert, y répond, au moins partiellement, à une question que ses amis, Eugène Fromentin et Paul Bataillard, lui avaient posée : pour être heureux, l'homme doit-il avoir de l'ambition? Aubert passe en revue l'évolution de l'humanité, du spiritualisme métaphysique au spiritualisme laïc, et nous donne un témoignage sur l'histoire des mentalités sous la monarchie de Juillet : à l'individualisme et au libéralisme de 1789 a succédé la réhabilitation de l'intervention de l'État, afin de développer la solidarité au sein de la société. Ce débat évoque des questions qui sont d'une brûlante actualité, à une époque où nous éprouvons les limites du modèle démocratique, la crise de l'État-providence, l'essoufflement du modèle social-démocrate et la baisse d'efficacité des thérapeutiques keynésiennes. On peut y voir aussi les prémices de Dominique, le roman de 1862 quasi autobiographique de Fromentin, où la retraite souhaitée par le héros éponyme, qui se donne pour un premier venu, comporte néanmoins une vie intérieure active et intense. Texte établi, avec Introduction et notes, par Barbara Wright, professeur émérite de littérature française à Trinity College, Dublin. (shrink)

Les maladies génétiques connues des parents pour être « à risque » chez leurs enfants lorsqu’ils engendrent, ou découvertes pendant la grossesse et plus tard dans l’enfance ou encore chez l’adulte à la faveur de son désir de procréation, perturbent, parfois gravement, l’établissement des liens généalogiques et de filiation selon la logique narcissique, ou leur maintien vivant entre parents et enfant, exposés qu’ils sont à la rupture, modifiant en conséquence les liens entre frères [frère et fils sont à entendre aux (...) sens générique, comprenant bien entendu sœurs et filles]. Il arrive même que ce soit l’enfant porteur de la maladie génétique qui révèle à son (ses) parent(s) qu’il(s) en est (sont) lui-même (eux-mêmes) porteur(s), opérant malgré lui une sorte de filiation inversée. La stabilité identitaire et la valeur narcissique des fils risquent de s’en trouver ébranlées ainsi que la qualité des liens qu’ils peuvent tisser et maintenir. L’exigence de reconnaissance du self authentique et du respect de sa continuité constitue un fil rouge. (shrink)

Cet article constitue l'un des éléments d'un dossier comparatif international sur le traitement médiatique de l'attentat survenu à la gare d'Atocha à Madrid en mars 2004. Centré sur la France et basé sur l'étude d'un corpus de quatre quotidiens, il analyse les orientations du discours développé par la presse nationale dans les jours qui ont suivi cet événement. L'analyse souligne que la presse française se veut plus explicative que celle d'autres pays participant à la coalition contre l'Irak. En majorité, la (...) construction politique européenne semble être une solution préconisée par la presse comme rempart au terrorisme.This article is one of a comparative study on the international media coverage of the attack in Atocha train station in Madrid in March 2004. Centered on France and based on the study of a corpus of four dailies, it analyzes the discourse developed by the national press in the days following the event. The analysis emphasizes that the French press wants more explanatory than other countries participating in the coalition against Iraq. The majority of European political construction seems to be a solution advocated by the press as a bulwark against terrorism. (shrink)

Nous étudions ici l’une des figures les plus originales et les plus complexes de l’univers du dernier Merleau-Ponty, l’une des moins bien comprises aussi : la « promiscuité ». Aussi polymorphe que la célèbre figure de l’«empiétement », la «promiscuité » appartient en propre au complexe de la psychanalyse ontologique de Merleau-Ponty. Elle décrit d’abord la logique des rapports archaïques avec autrui, et se situe en cela dans la ligne du travail sur l’intercorporéité. Elle désigne aussi la modalité connaissante de (...) la chair, tout en indiquant notre résistance à celle-ci, notre ignorance naturelle de la chair comme être de promiscuité. Elle habite bientôt le cœur de la conception merleau-pontienne de l’inconscient, dans le prolongement des travaux de Paul Schilder sur l’image du corps. Enfin, elle vient renouveler dans les derniers manuscrits l’idée même de mystère ontologique. La chair, être de promiscuité, vit dans la promiscuité de l’être. Et la philosophie, d’après Merleau-Ponty, devrait être le savoir cohérent des visages apparemment si divers de cette ultime figure du lien. (shrink)

Le simple risque génétique, à plus forte raison la maladie avérée, lorsqu’ils sont connus, perturbent profondément narcissisme et bases de la filiation construits depuis l’enfance, et compromettent les échafaudages nécessaires pour réaliser une famille et payer sa dette de vie. Le trouble touche personne et famille, chacun dans sa lignée, et à l’articulation des deux lignées dont naîtrait l’enfant. Le parent concerné par le risque doit négocier à plusieurs niveaux, qu’il faut relier les uns aux autres, pour conserver son intégrité (...) psychique, décider de procréer et de garder l’enfant conçu. Son moi doit départager désirs personnels, satisfaction du conjoint, ordres du surmoi et finalement décider. S’il ne l’a déjà fait, informer le parent conjoint du risque, en admettre les effets, et en discuter s’impose. Le conjoint sera lui aussi confronté à un conflit entre désir d’enfant idéal et rejet de l’image de monstre associée à l’atteinte génétique. Chacun des deux, puis ensemble, doivent trouver le compromis satisfaisant avec famille et belle-famille. Personne et couple doivent négocier avec médecins réel et imaginaire, représentants d’une autorité sociale. Ce contexte à fort potentiel traumatique favorise les modalités défensives extrêmes chez tous les partenaires – passage à l’acte, déni, pensée opératoire –, qui compromettent la vitalité de l’édification et du maintien de la famille. (shrink)

Acteur majeur de la philosophie morale anglo-saxonne du second vingtième siècle, Richard Mervyn Hare n’avait encore jamais été traduit en français. C’est désormais chose faite grâce au travail de Malik Bozzo-Rey, Jean-Pierre Cléro et Claire Wrobel. Leur choix s’est judicieusement porté sur Moral Thinking : Its Levels, Method, and Point, ouvrage paru en 1981 et qui constitue sans doute la meilleure porte d’entrée à l’ambitieuse philosophie morale de Hare. Il s’agit en effet du pre...

Table of contentsI1 Proceedings of the 4th World Conference on Research IntegrityConcurrent Sessions:1. Countries' systems and policies to foster research integrityCS01.1 Second time around: Implementing and embedding a review of responsible conduct of research policy and practice in an Australian research-intensive universitySusan Patricia O'BrienCS01.2 Measures to promote research integrity in a university: the case of an Asian universityDanny Chan, Frederick Leung2. Examples of research integrity education programmes in different countriesCS02.1 Development of a state-run “cyber education program of research ethics” in (...) KoreaEun Jung Ko, Jin Sun Kwak, TaeHwan Gwon, Ji Min Lee, Min-Ho LeeCS02.3 Responsible conduct of research teachers’ training courses in Germany: keeping on drilling through hard boards for more RCR teachersHelga Nolte, Michael Gommel, Gerlinde Sponholz3. The research environment and policies to encourage research integrityCS03.1 Challenges and best practices in research integrity: bridging the gap between policy and practiceYordanka Krastev, Yamini Sandiran, Julia Connell, Nicky SolomonCS03.2 The Slovenian initiative for better research: from national activities to global reflectionsUrsa Opara Krasovec, Renata SribarCS03.3 Organizational climate assessments to support research integrity: background of the Survey of Organizational Research Climate and the experience with its use at Michigan State UniversityBrian C. Martinson, Carol R. Thrush, C.K. Gunsalus4. Expressions of concern and retractionsCS04.1 Proposed guidelines for retraction notices and their disseminationIvan Oransky, Adam MarcusCS04.2 Watching retractions: analysis of process and practice, with data from the Wiley retraction archivesChris Graf, Verity Warne, Edward Wates, Sue JoshuaCS04.3 An exploratory content analysis of Expressions of ConcernMiguel RoigCS04.4 An ethics researcher in the retraction processMichael Mumford5. Funders' role in fostering research integrityCS05.1 The Fonds de Recherche du Québec’s institutional rules on the responsible conduct of research: introspection in the funding agency activitiesMylène Deschênes, Catherine Olivier, Raphaëlle Dupras-LeducCS05.2 U.S. Public Health Service funds in an international setting: research integrity and complianceZoë Hammatt, Raju Tamot, Robin Parker, Cynthia Ricard, Loc Nguyen-Khoa, Sandra TitusCS05.3 Analyzing decision making of funders of public research as a case of information asymmetryKarsten Klint JensenCS05.4 Research integrity management: Empirical investigation of academia versus industrySimon Godecharle, Ben Nemery, Kris Dierickx5A: Education: For whom, how, and what?CS05A.1 Research integrity or responsible conduct of research? What do we aim for?Mickey Gjerris, Maud Marion Laird Eriksen, Jeppe Berggren HoejCS05A.2 Teaching and learning about RCR at the same time: a report on Epigeum’s RCR poll questions and other assessment activitiesNicholas H. SteneckCS05A.4 Minding the gap in research ethics education: strategies to assess and improve research competencies in community health workers/promoteresCamille Nebeker, Michael Kalichman, Elizabeth Mejia Booen, Blanca Azucena Pacheco, Rebeca Espinosa Giacinto, Sheila Castaneda6. Country examples of research reward systems and integrityCS06.1 Improving systems to promote responsible research in the Chinese Academy of SciencesDing Li, Qiong Chen, Guoli Zhu, Zhonghe SunCS06.4 Exploring the perception of research integrity amongst public health researchers in IndiaParthasarathi Ganguly, Barna Ganguly7. Education and guidance on research integrity: country differencesCS07.1 From integrity to unity: how research integrity guidance differs across universities in Europe.Noémie Aubert Bonn, Kris Dierickx, Simon GodecharleCS07.2 Can education and training develop research integrity? The spirit of the UNESCO 1974 recommendation and its updatingDaniele Bourcier, Jacques Bordé, Michèle LeducCS07.3 The education and implementation mechanisms of research ethics in Taiwan's higher education: an experience in Chinese web-based curriculum development for responsible conduct of researchChien Chou, Sophia Jui-An PanCS07.4 Educating principal investigators in Swiss research institutions: present and future perspectivesLouis Xaver Tiefenauer8. Measuring and rewarding research productivityCS08.1 Altimpact: how research integrity underpins research impactDaniel Barr, Paul TaylorCS08.2 Publication incentives: just reward or misdirection of funds?Lyn Margaret HornCS08.3 Why Socrates never charged a fee: factors contributing to challenges for research integrity and publication ethicsDeborah Poff9. Plagiarism and falsification: Behaviour and detectionCS09.1 Personality traits predict attitude towards plagiarism of self and others in biomedicine: plagiarism, yes we can?Martina Mavrinac, Gordana Brumini, Mladen PetrovečkiCS09.2 Investigating the concept of and attitudes toward plagiarism for science teachers in Brazil: any challenges for research integrity and policy?Christiane Coelho Santos, Sonia VasconcelosCS09.3 What have we learnt?: The CrossCheck Service from CrossRefRachael LammeyCS09.4 High p-values as a sign of data fabrication/falsificationChris Hartgerink, Marcel van Assen, Jelte Wicherts10. Codes for research integrity and collaborationsCS10.1 Research integrity in cross-border cooperation: a Nordic exampleHanne Silje HaugeCS10.3 Research integrity, research misconduct, and the National Science Foundation's requirement for the responsible conduct of researchAaron MankaCS10.4 A code of conduct for international scientific cooperation: human rights and research integrity in scientific collaborations with international academic and industry partnersRaffael Iturrizaga11. Countries' efforts to establish mentoring and networksCS11.1 ENRIO : a network facilitating common approaches on research integrity in EuropeNicole FoegerCS11.2 Helping junior investigators develop in a resource-limited country: a mentoring program in PeruA. Roxana Lescano, Claudio Lanata, Gissella Vasquez, Leguia Mariana, Marita Silva, Mathew Kasper, Claudia Montero, Daniel Bausch, Andres G LescanoCS11.3 Netherlands Research Integrity Network: the first six monthsFenneke Blom, Lex BouterCS11.4 A South African framework for research ethics and integrity for researchers, postgraduate students, research managers and administratorsLaetus OK Lategan12. Training and education in research integrity at an early career stageCS12.1 Research integrity in curricula for medical studentsGustavo Fitas ManaiaCS12.2 Team-based learning for training in the responsible conduct of research supports ethical decision-makingWayne T. McCormack, William L. Allen, Shane Connelly, Joshua Crites, Jeffrey Engler, Victoria Freedman, Cynthia W. Garvan, Paul Haidet, Joel Hockensmith, William McElroy, Erik Sander, Rebecca Volpe, Michael F. VerderameCS12.4 Research integrity and career prospects of junior researchersSnezana Krstic13. Systems and research environments in institutionsCS13.1 Implementing systems in research institutions to improve quality and reduce riskLouise HandyCS13.2 Creating an institutional environment that supports research integrityDebra Schaller-DemersCS13.3 Ethics and Integrity Development Grants: a mechanism to foster cultures of ethics and integrityPaul Taylor, Daniel BarrCS13.4 A culture of integrity at KU LeuvenInge Lerouge, Gerard Cielen, Liliane Schoofs14. Peer review and its role in research integrityCS14.1 Peer review research across disciplines: transdomain action in the European Cooperation in Science and Technology “New Frontiers of Peer Review ”Ana Marusic, Flaminio SquazzoniCS14.2 Using blinding to reduce bias in peer reviewDavid VauxCS14.3 How to intensify the role of reviewers to promote research integrityKhalid Al-Wazzan, Ibrahim AlorainyCS14.4 Credit where credit’s due: professionalizing and rewarding the role of peer reviewerChris Graf, Verity Warne15. Research ethics and oversight for research integrity: Does it work?CS15.1 The psychology of decision-making in research ethics governance structures: a theory of bounded rationalityNolan O'Brien, Suzanne Guerin, Philip DoddCS15.2 Investigator irregularities: iniquity, ignorance or incompetence?Frank Wells, Catherine BlewettCS15.3 Academic plagiarismFredric M. Litto16. Research integrity in EuropeCS16.1 Whose responsibility is it anyway?: A comparative analysis of core concepts and practice at European research-intensive universities to identify and develop good practices in research integrityItziar De Lecuona, Erika Löfstrom, Katrien MaesCS16.2 Research integrity guidance in European research universitiesKris Dierickx, Noémie Bonn, Simon GodecharleCS16.3 Research Integrity: processes and initiatives in Science Europe member organisationsTony Peatfield, Olivier Boehme, Science Europe Working Group on Research IntegrityCS16.4 Promoting research integrity in Italy: the experience of the Research Ethics and Bioethics Advisory Committee of the Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche Cinzia Caporale, Daniele Fanelli17. Training programs for research integrity at different levels of experience and seniorityCS17.1 Meaningful ways to incorporate research integrity and the responsible conduct of research into undergraduate, graduate, postdoctoral and faculty training programsJohn Carfora, Eric Strauss, William LynnCS17.2 "Recognize, respond, champion": Developing a one-day interactive workshop to increase confidence in research integrity issuesDieter De Bruyn, Bracke Nele, Katrien De Gelder, Stefanie Van der BurghtCS17.4 “Train the trainer” on cultural challenges imposed by international research integrity conversations: lessons from a projectJosé Roberto Lapa e Silva, Sonia M. R. Vasconcelos18. Research and societal responsibilityCS18.1 Promoting the societal responsibility of research as an integral part of research integrityHelene IngierdCS18.2 Social responsibility as an ethical imperative for scientists: research, education and service to societyMark FrankelCS18.3 The intertwined nature of social responsibility and hope in scienceDaniel Vasgird, Stephanie BirdCS18.4 Common barriers that impede our ability to create a culture of trustworthiness in the research communityMark Yarborough19. Publication ethicsCS19.1 The authors' forum: A proposed tool to improve practices of journal editors and promote a responsible research environmentIbrahim Alorainy, Khalid Al-WazzanCS19.2 Quantifying research integrity and its impact with text analyticsHarold GarnerCS19.3 A closer look at authorship and publication ethics of multi- and interdisciplinary teamsLisa Campo-Engelstein, Zubin Master, Elise Smith, David Resnik, Bryn Williams-JonesCS19.4 Invisibility of duplicate publications in biomedicineMario Malicki, Ana Utrobicic, Ana Marusic20. The causes of bad and wasteful research: What can we do?CS20.1 From countries to individuals: unravelling the causes of bias and misconduct with multilevel meta-meta-analysisDaniele Fanelli, John PA IoannidisCS20.2 Reducing research waste by integrating systems of oversight and regulationGerben ter Riet, Tom Walley, Lex Marius BouterCS20.3 What are the determinants of selective reporting?: The example of palliative care for non-cancer conditionsJenny van der Steen, Lex BouterCS20.4 Perceptions of plagiarism, self-plagiarism and redundancy in research: preliminary results from a national survey of Brazilian PhDsSonia Vasconcelos, Martha Sorenson, Francisco Prosdocimi, Hatisaburo Masuda, Edson Watanabe, José Carlos Pinto, Marisa Palácios, José Lapa e Silva, Jacqueline Leta, Adalberto Vieyra, André Pinto, Mauricio Sant’Ana, Rosemary Shinkai21. Are there country-specific elements of misconduct?CS21.1 The battle with plagiarism in Russian science: latest developmentsBoris YudinCS21.2 Researchers between ethics and misconduct: A French survey on social representations of misconduct and ethical standards within the scientific communityEtienne Vergès, Anne-Sophie Brun-Wauthier, Géraldine VialCS21.3 Experience from different ways of dealing with research misconduct and promoting research integrity in some Nordic countriesTorkild VintherCS21.4 Are there specifics in German research misconduct and the ways to cope with it?Volker Bähr, Charité22. Research integrity teaching programmes and their challengesCS22.1 Faculty mentors and research integrityMichael Kalichman, Dena PlemmonsCS22.2 Training the next generation of scientists to use principles of research quality assurance to improve data integrity and reliabilityRebecca Lynn Davies, Katrina LaubeCS22.3 Fostering research integrity in a culturally-diverse environmentCynthia Scheopner, John GallandCS22.4 Towards a standard retraction formHervé Maisonneuve, Evelyne Decullier23. Commercial research and integrityCS23.1 The will to commercialize: matters of concern in the cultural economy of return-on-investment researchBrian NobleCS23.2 Quality in drug discovery data reporting: a mission impossible?Anja Gilis, David J. Gallacher, Tom Lavrijssen, Malwitz David, Malini Dasgupta, Hans MolsCS23.3 Instituting a research integrity policy in the context of semi-private-sector funding: an example in the field of occupational health and safetyPaul-Emile Boileau24. The interface of publication ethics and institutional policiesCS24.1 The open access ethical paradox in an open government effortTony SavardCS24.2 How journals and institutions can work together to promote responsible conductEric MahCS24.3 Improving cooperation between journals and research institutions in research integrity casesElizabeth Wager, Sabine Kleinert25. Reproducibility of research and retractionsCS25.1 Promoting transparency in publications to reduce irreproducibilityVeronique Kiermer, Andrew Hufton, Melanie ClyneCS25.2 Retraction notices issued for publications by Latin American authors: what lessons can we learn?Sonia Vasconcelos, Renan Moritz Almeida, Aldo Fontes-Pereira, Fernanda Catelani, Karina RochaCS25.3 A preliminary report of the findings from the Reproducibility Project: Cancer biologyElizabeth Iorns, William Gunn26. Research integrity and specific country initiativesCS26.1 Promoting research integrity at CNRS, FranceMichèle Leduc, Lucienne LetellierCS26.2 In pursuit of compliance: is the tail wagging the dog?Cornelia MalherbeCS26.3 Newly established research integrity policies and practices: oversight systems of Japanese research universitiesTakehito Kamata27. Responsible conduct of research and country guidelinesCS27.1 Incentives or guidelines? Promoting responsible research communication through economic incentives or ethical guidelines?Vidar EnebakkCS27.3 Responsible conduct of research: a view from CanadaLynn PenrodCS27.4 The Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity: a national initiative to promote research integrity in DenmarkThomas Nørgaard, Charlotte Elverdam28. Behaviour, trust and honestyCS28.1 The reasons behind non-ethical behaviour in academiaYves FassinCS28.2 The psychological profile of the dishonest scholarCynthia FekkenCS28.3 Considering the implications of Dan Ariely’s keynote speech at the 3rd World Conference on Research Integrity in MontréalJamal Adam, Melissa S. AndersonCS28.4 Two large surveys on psychologists’ views on peer review and replicationJelte WichertsBrett Buttliere29. Reporting and publication bias and how to overcome itCS29.1 Data sharing: Experience at two open-access general medical journalsTrish GrovesCS29.2 Overcoming publication bias and selective reporting: completing the published recordDaniel ShanahanCS29.3 The EQUATOR Network: promoting responsible reporting of health research studiesIveta Simera, Shona Kirtley, Eleana Villanueva, Caroline Struthers, Angela MacCarthy, Douglas Altman30. The research environment and its implications for integrityCS30.1 Ranking of scientists: the Russian experienceElena GrebenshchikovaCS30.4 From cradle to grave: research integrity, research misconduct and cultural shiftsBronwyn Greene, Ted RohrPARTNER SYMPOSIAPartner Symposium AOrganized by EQUATOR Network, Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health ResearchP1 Can we trust the medical research literature?: Poor reporting and its consequencesIveta SimeraP2 What can BioMed Central do to improve published research?Daniel Shanahan, Stephanie HarrimanP3 What can a "traditional" journal do to improve published research?Trish GrovesP4 Promoting good reporting practice for reliable and usable research papers: EQUATOR Network, reporting guidelines and other initiativesCaroline StruthersPartner Symposium COrganized by ENRIO, the European Network of Research Integrity OfficersP5 Transparency and independence in research integrity investigations in EuropeKrista Varantola, Helga Nolte, Ursa Opara, Torkild Vinther, Elizabeth Wager, Thomas NørgaardPartner Symposium DOrganized by IEEE, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics EngineersRe-educating our author community: IEEE's approach to bibliometric manipulation, plagiarism, and other inappropriate practicesP6 Dealing with plagiarism in the connected world: An Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers perspectiveJon RokneP7 Should evaluation of raises, promotion, and research proposals be tied to bibliometric indictors? What the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers is doing to answer this questionGianluca SettiP8 Recommended practices to ensure conference content qualityGordon MacPhersonPartner Symposium EOrganized by the Committee on Freedom and Responsibility in the Conduct of Science of ICSU, the International Council for ScienceResearch assessment and quality in science: perspectives from international science and policy organisationsP9 Challenges for science and the problems of assessing researchEllen HazelkornP10 Research assessment and science policy developmentCarthage SmithP11 Research integrity in South Africa: the value of procedures and processes to global positioningRobert H. McLaughlinP12 Rewards, careers and integrity: perspectives of young scientists from around the worldTatiana Duque MartinsPartner Symposium FOrganized by the Online Resource Center for Ethics Education in Engineering and Science / Center for Engineering, Ethics, and Society of the National Academy of EngineeringP13 Research misconduct: conceptions and policy solutionsTetsuya Tanimoto, Nicholas Steneck, Daniele Fanelli, Ragnvald Kalleberg, Tajammul HusseinPartner Symposium HOrganized by ORI, the Office of Research Integrity; Universitas 21; and the Asia Pacific Research Integrity NetworkP14 International integrity networks: working together to ensure research integrityPing Sun, Ovid Tzeng, Krista Varantola, Susan ZimmermanPartner Symposium IOrganized by COPE, the Committee on Publication EthicsPublication without borders: Ethical challenges in a globalized worldP15 Authorship: credit and responsibility, including issues in large and interdisciplinary studiesRosemary ShinkaiPartner Symposium JOrganized by CITI, the Cooperative Institutional Training InitiativeExperiences on research integrity educational programs in Colombia, Costa Rica and PeruP16 Experiences in PeruRoxana LescanoP17 Experiences in Costa RicaElizabeth HeitmanP18 Experiences in ColumbiaMaria Andrea Rocio del Pilar Contreras NietoPoster Session B: Education, training, promotion and policyPT.01 The missing role of journal editors in promoting responsible researchIbrahim Alorainy, Khalid Al-WazzanPT.02 Honorary authorship in Taiwan: why and who should be in charge?Chien Chou, Sophia Jui-An PanPT.03 Authorship and citation manipulation in academic researchEric Fong, Al WilhitePT.04 Open peer review of research submission at medical journals: experience at BMJ Open and The BMJTrish GrovesPT.05 Exercising authorship: claiming rewards, practicing integrityDésirée Motta-RothPT.07 Medical scientists' views on publication culture: a focus group studyJoeri Tijdink, Yvo SmuldersPoster Session B: Education, training, promotion and policyPT.09 Ethical challenges in post-graduate supervisionLaetus OK LateganPT.10 The effects of viable ethics instruction on international studentsMichael Mumford, Logan Steele, Logan Watts, James Johnson, Shane Connelly, Lee WilliamsPT.11 Does language reflect the quality of research?Gerben ter Riet, Sufia Amini, Lotty Hooft, Halil KilicogluPT.12 Integrity complaints as a strategic tool in policy decision conflictsJanneke van Seters, Herman Eijsackers, Fons Voragen, Akke van der Zijpp and Frans BromPoster Session C: Ethics and integrity intersectionsPT.14 Regulations of informed consent: university-supported research processes and pitfalls in implementationBadaruddin Abbasi, Naif Nasser AlmasoudPT.15 A review of equipoise as a requirement in clinical trialsAdri LabuschagnePT.16 The Research Ethics Library: online resource for research ethics educationJohanne Severinsen, Espen EnghPT.17 Research integrity: the view from King Abdulaziz City for Science and TechnologyDaham Ismail AlaniPT. 18 Meeting global challenges in high-impact publications and research integrity: the case of the Malaysian Palm Oil BoardHJ. Kamaruzaman JusoffPT.19 University faculty perceptions of research practices and misconductAnita Gordon, Helen C. HartonPoster Session D: International perspectivesPT.21 The Commission for Scientific Integrity as a response to research fraudDieter De Bruyn, Stefanie Van der BurghtPT. 22 Are notions of the responsible conduct of research associated with compliance with requirements for research on humans in different disciplinary traditions in Brazil?Karina de Albuquerque Rocha, Sonia Maria Ramos de VasconcelosPT.23 Creating an environment that promotes research integrity: an institutional model of Malawi Liverpool Welcome TrustLimbanazo MatandikaPT.24 How do science policies in Brazil influence user-engaged ecological research?Aline Carolina de Oliveira Machado Prata, Mark William NeffPoster Session E: Perspectives on misconductPT.26 What “causes” scientific misconduct?: Testing major hypotheses by comparing corrected and retracted papersDaniele Fanelli, Rodrigo Costas, Vincent LarivièrePT.27 Perception of academic plagiarism among dentistry studentsDouglas Leonardo Gomes Filho, Diego Oliveira GuedesPT. 28 a few bad apples?: Prevalence, patterns and attitudes towards scientific misconduct among doctoral students at a German university hospitalVolker Bähr, Niklas Keller, Markus Feufel, Nikolas OffenhauserPT. 29 Analysis of retraction notices published by BioMed CentralMaria K. Kowalczuk, Elizabeth C. MoylanPT.31 "He did it" doesn't work: data security, incidents and partnersKatie SpeanburgPoster Session F: Views from the disciplinesPT.32 Robust procedures: a key to generating quality results in drug discoveryMalini Dasgupta, Mariusz Lubomirski, Tom Lavrijssen, David Malwitz, David Gallacher, Anja GillisPT.33 Health promotion: criteria for the design and the integrity of a research projectMaria Betânia de Freitas Marques, Laressa Lima Amâncio, Raphaela Dias Fernandes, Oliveira Patrocínio, and Cláudia Maria Correia Borges RechPT.34 Integrity of academic work from the perspective of students graduating in pharmacy: a brief research studyMaria Betânia de Freitas Marques, Cláudia Maria Correia Borges Rech, Adriana Nascimento SousaPT.35 Research integrity promotion in the Epidemiology and Health Services, the journal of the Brazilian Unified Health SystemLeila Posenato GarciaPT.36 When are clinical trials registered? An analysis of prospective versus retrospective registration of clinical trials published in the BioMed Central series, UKStephanie Harriman, Jigisha PatelPT.37 Maximizing welfare while promoting innovation in drug developmentFarida LadaOther posters that will be displayed but not presented orally:PT.38 Geoethics and the debate on research integrity in geosciencesGiuseppe Di Capua, Silvia PeppoloniPT.39 Introducing the Professionalism and Integrity in Research Program James M. DuBois, John Chibnall, Jillon Van der WallPT.40 Validation of the professional decision-making in research measureJames M. DuBois, John Chibnall, Jillon Van der Wall, Raymond TaitPT.41 General guidelines for research ethicsJacob HolenPT. 42 A national forum for research ethicsAdele Flakke Johannessen, Torunn EllefsenPT.43 Evaluation of integrity in coursework: an approach from the perspective of the higher education professorClaudia Rech, Adriana Sousa, Maria Betânia de Freitas MarquesPT.44 Principles of geoethics and research integrity applied to the European Multidisciplinary Seafloor and Water Column Observatory, a large-scale European environmental research infrastructureSilvia Peppoloni, Giuseppe Di Capua, Laura BeranzoliF1 Focus track on improving research systems: the role of fundersPaulo S.L. Beirão, Susan ZimmermanF2 Focus track on improving research systems: the role of countriesSabine Kleinert, Ana MarusicF3 Focus track on improving research systems: the role of institutionsMelissa S. Anderson, Lex Bouter. (shrink)