The Case of Vipul Bhrigu and the Federal Definition of Research Misconduct

Science and Engineering Ethics 20 (2):411-421 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The Office of Research Integrity found in 2011 that Vipul Bhrigu, a postdoctoral researcher who sabotaged a colleague’s research materials, was guilty of misconduct. However, I argue that this judgment is ill-considered and sets a problematic precedent for future cases. I first discuss the current federal definition of research misconduct and representative cases of research misconduct. Then, because this case recalls a debate from the 1990s over what the definition of “research misconduct” ought to be, I briefly recapitulate that history and reconsider the Bhrigu case in light of that history and in comparison to other cases involving tampering. Finally, I consider what the aim of a definition of research misconduct ought to be, and argue that the precedent set by the reasoning in this case is problematic

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 89,654

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Scientific misconduct: Present problems and future trends.Barbara Mishkin - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):283-292.
Misconduct in science and the German law.Stefanic Stegemann-Bochl - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):57-62.
Image manipulation as research misconduct.Debra Parrish & Bridget Noonan - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (2):161-167.
The legacy of the Hwang case: Research misconduct in biosciences.Péter Kakuk - 2009 - Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (4):545-562.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-09-04

Downloads
30 (#453,643)

6 months
2 (#648,997)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Lisa Marie Rasmussen
University of North Carolina, Charlotte

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references