EDITORIAL - Research Integrity and Scientific Misconduct

Anthony J. (Tony) Smith, Editor
J Dent Res 87(3):197, 2008
>>>

Most institutions have policies and guidelines for research integrity and misconduct, but I wonder how many of us have read these? The fact that some countries have set up organizations to regulate research integrity perhaps reflects the level of concern about this issue. Our own regulatory controls—through IRB and ethical review committee approvals, national legislation, and peer review at the research publication stage—are clearly insufficient to prevent some researchers contemplating misconduct. Scientific journals now ask authors to make several declarations at submission about the integrity of their research, but nevertheless concerns remain. Many journals will have experienced plagiarism at some stage, and this highlights the differing attitudes to such misconduct (Brumfiel 2007; Yilmaz 2007). Collaborations with other researchers require a level of trust on both sides, and we should remember that when collaborative research is published, responsibility lies with all of the authors to ensure that the research has been conducted with the highest standards of integrity, and that all authors have had access to the primary data. Dual publication of data is also unacceptable, unless the previously published work is fully acknowledged, and similar caveats hold for the re-analysis of previously reported data.>>>

How Did Honor Evolve?

The biology of integrity

By David P. BARASH

The Chronicle Review,Volume 54, Issue 37, Page B11

P.S.- David P. Barash is an evolutionary biologist, a professor of psychology at the University of Washington, and a frequent Chronicle contributor. He has never had to turn in any honor-code violators but has on occasion had the unpleasant task of dealing with them.

The Plagiarism Decision Process: The Role of Pressure and Rationalization

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 51, NO. 2, Page(s): 152-156, MAY 2008

Richard H. McCuen

Abstract — Plagiarism is more than just the failure to use quotation marks or to cite a paraphrased passage. Dual publishing, self-plagiarism, and ghost authorship are other forms of plagiarism. Plagiarism is generally viewed as an act when, in fact, it is a decision process. Five steps are used here to represent plagiarism as a decision process. Various forms of pressure act as stimuli to begin the process, and rationalization is used to justify the decision and to avoid feelings of regret. Education is necessary to decrease the likelihood that an individual will opt to plagiarize when faced with the opportunity. Considerations for education of graduate students and young faculty are discussed.

Index Terms — Decision making, dual publishing, education, ethics, ghost authorship, plagiarism, pressure, rationalization, self-plagiarism.