Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Minimizing Questionable Research Practices – The Role of Norms, Counter Norms, and Micro-Organizational Ethics Discussion.Solmaz Filiz Karabag, Christian Berggren, Jolanta Pielaszkiewicz & Bengt Gerdin - forthcoming - Journal of Academic Ethics:1-27.
    Breaches of research integrity have gained considerable attention due to high-profile scandals involving questionable research practices by reputable scientists. These practices include plagiarism, manipulation of authorship, biased presentation of findings and misleading reports of significance. To combat such practices, policymakers tend to rely on top-down measures, mandatory ethics training and stricter regulation, despite limited evidence of their effectiveness. In this study, we investigate the occurrence and underlying factors of questionable research practices (QRPs) through an original survey of 3,005 social and (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • From research misconduct to disciplinary sanction: an empirical examination of French higher education case law.Olivier Leclerc & Nicolas Klausser - forthcoming - Research Ethics.
    Reporting and investigating research misconduct can lead to disciplinary proceedings being initiated, and ultimately to disciplinary sanctions being imposed on convicted scientists. The conversion of research misconduct findings into disciplinary sanctions is poorly understood. This article analyses all the disciplinary decisions handed down on appeal by the Conseil national de l'enseignement supérieur et de la recherche (CNESER) between 1991 and 2023, concerning breaches of research integrity by academics and doctoral students ( n = 333). Three findings are highlighted. Firstly, the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Using electronic discussion boards to teach responsible conduct of research.David B. Resnik - 2005 - Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (4):617-630.
    This study presents the results of a survey of student satisfaction with electronic discussion boards in a course on the responsible conduct of research (RCR). On a 1–5 scale, the respondents stated that the use of the electronic discussion board was an effective teaching tool (4.71), that it enabled them to get feedback from their peers (4.43), that it helped promote discussion and debate (4.36), that it helped them learn how to analyze ethical dilemmas in research (4.36), and that they (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Scholars’ preferred solutions for research misconduct: results from a survey of faculty members at America’s top 100 research universities.Travis C. Pratt, Michael D. Reisig, Kristy Holtfreter & Katelyn A. Golladay - 2019 - Ethics and Behavior 29 (7):510-530.
    Research misconduct is harmful because it threatens public health and public safety, and also undermines public confidence in science. Efforts to eradicate ongoing and prevent future misconduct are numerous and varied, yet the question of “what works” remains largely unanswered. To shed light on this issue, this study used data from both mail and online surveys administered to a stratified random sample of tenured and tenure-track faculty members (N = 613) in the social, natural, and applied sciences at America’s top (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Educational technologies and the teaching of ethics in science and engineering.Michael C. Loui - 2005 - Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (3):435-446.
    To support the teaching of ethics in science and engineering, educational technologies offer a variety of functions: communication between students and instructors, production of documents, distribution of documents, archiving of class sessions, and access to remote resources. Instructors may choose to use these functions of the technologies at different levels of intensity, to support a variety of pedagogies, consistent with accepted good practices. Good pedagogical practices are illustrated in this paper with four examples of uses of educational technologies in the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Plagiarism in articles published in journals indexed in the Scientific Periodicals Electronic Library (SPELL): a comparative analysis between 2013 and 2018.Marcelo Krokoscz - 2021 - International Journal for Educational Integrity 17 (1).
    This study analyzes the possible occurrence of plagiarism and self-plagiarism in a sample of articles published in the Scientific Periodicals Electronic Library, an open database that indexes business journals in Brazil. The author compared one sample obtained in 2013 and another selected from 2018. In both samples, we verified the guidelines that each of the journals provided to authors regarding plagiarism and the adoption of software to detect textual similarities. In the analysis conducted in 2013, it was found that only (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Exploring the role of the research integrity officer: Commentary on ‘seven ways to plagiarize: Handling real allegations of research misconduct’.Lisa N. Geller - 2002 - Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (4):540-542.
  • Advice for Plagiarism Whistleblowers.Mark Fox & Jeffrey Beall - 2014 - Ethics and Behavior 24 (5):341-349.
    Scholarly open-access publishing has made it easier for researchers to discover and report academic misconduct such as plagiarism. However, as the website Retraction Watch shows, plagiarism is by no means limited to open-access journals. Moreover, various web-based services provide plagiarism detection software, facilitating one’s ability to detect pirated content. Upon discovering plagiarism, some are compelled to report it, but being a plagiarism whistleblower is inherently stressful and can leave one vulnerable to criticism and retaliation by colleagues and others. Reporting plagiarism (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Education Journal Editors’ Perspectives on Self-Plagiarism.Samuel V. Bruton & John R. Rachal - 2015 - Journal of Academic Ethics 13 (1):13-25.
    The perspectives of academic journal editors regarding self-plagiarism were examined by means of an online survey in which 277 editors of education journals participated. Following the survey, a sub-sample of 14 editors were interviewed. A substantial majority of editors were found to be in accord with the most recent edition of the Publication Manual of the APA in believing that re-use of long, verbatim passages or tables, figures and images from an author’s previously published work without appropriate citation is unethical, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Plagiarism: Words and ideas.Mathieu Bouville - 2008 - Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (3):311-322.
    Plagiarism is a crime against academy. It deceives readers, hurts plagiarized authors, and gets the plagiarist undeserved benefits. However, even though these arguments do show that copying other people’s intellectual contribution is wrong, they do not apply to the copying of words. Copying a few sentences that contain no original idea (e.g. in the introduction) is of marginal importance compared to stealing the ideas of others. The two must be clearly distinguished, and the ‘plagiarism’ label should not be used for (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • Assessing the Preparedness of Research Integrity Officers (RIOs) to Appropriately Handle Possible Research Misconduct Cases.Arthur J. Bonito, Sandra L. Titus & David E. Wright - 2012 - Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (4):605-619.
    Institutions receiving federal funding for research from the U.S.Public Health Service need to have policies and procedures to both prevent research misconduct and to adjudicate it when it occurs. The person who is designated to handle research misconduct is typically referred to as the research integrity officer (RIO). In this interview study we report on 79 RIOs who describe how they would handle allegations of research misconduct. Their responses were compared to two expert RIOs. The responses to the allegations in (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Self-plagiarism and dual and redundant publications: What is the problem?: Commentary on ‘seven ways to plagiarize: Handling real allegations of research misconduct’.Stephanie J. Bird - 2002 - Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (4):543-544.
  • Self-plagiarism and dual and redundant publications: What is the problem?: Commentary on ‘seven ways to plagiarize: Handling real allegations of research misconduct’ (M. C. Loui). [REVIEW]Stephanie J. Bird - 2002 - Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (4):543-544.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Helping Students Avoid Plagiarism in Online Courses.Stephen Asunka - 2011 - International Journal of Cyber Ethics in Education 1 (4):42-60.
    This study used design-based research approaches to investigate student plagiarism in an online course, with the objective of determining the instructional interventionist strategies that can help students avoid the practice in online courses. Twenty eight undergraduate students who were engaged in a semester-long online course in Educational Technology at a private university in Ghana participated in the study. Drawing on relevant learning and related theories, the study implemented different learning activities pertaining to plagiarism at regular intervals during the semester, and (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Self-Plagiarism in Academic Publishing: The Anatomy of a Misnomer. [REVIEW]Liviu Andreescu - 2013 - Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (3):775-797.
    The paper discusses self-plagiarism and associated practices in scholarly publishing. It approaches at some length the conceptual issues raised by the notion of self-plagiarism. It distinguishes among and then examines the main families of arguments against self-plagiarism, as well as the question of possibly legitimate reasons to engage in this practice. It concludes that some of the animus frequently reserved for self-plagiarism may be the result of, among others, poor choice of a label, unwarranted generalizations as to its ill effects (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations