Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Scientific dishonesty and good scientific practice.

Authors: D, Andersen; N H, Axelsen; P, Riis;

Scientific dishonesty and good scientific practice.

Abstract

Scientific dishonesty has been the subject of much public interest in recent years. Although the problem has had a low profile in Denmark, there is no reason to believe that it is non-existent. Several preconditions known to be important prevail here as well as in other countries, such as pressure to publish and severe competition for research grants and senior academic positions. The Danish Medical Research Council (DMRC) decided to respond to this problem by preparing a report on scientific dishonesty with suggestions to the research institutions on rules for good scientific practice and procedures for investigation of suspected dishonesty. To this end, an investigatory system was suggested. The system should consist of two regional committees and one national committee. They should be headed by high court judges and experienced health sciences researchers as members. The committees will investigate cases reported to them and conclude on whether dishonesty has been established and on whether the scientific work should be retracted. Sanctions shall remain the task of the institutions. Preventive measures comprise open access to and a long storage period for scientific data.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Denmark, Research, Scientific Misconduct, United States, Ethics, Professional

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    3
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
3
Average
Top 10%
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!