Fostering Integrity in Research (2017) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
1 Introduction
1 Introduction
Pages 13-26
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 13... ...
New drugs and devices, including imaging devices based on research into the properties of materials, have contributed to the extension and improvement of human life. The development of digital technologies has not only expanded human capabilities but has created entirely new ways of communicating, sensing, analyzing, learning, and doing research.
|
From page 14... ...
Some researchers deviate from the norms and practices that they are expected to fulfill. The reasons can be complex, including intentional or negligent actions resulting from carelessness or other individual shortcomings coupled with environmental pressures and institutional practices.
|
From page 15... ...
A central goal of this report is to identify best practices in research and to recommend practical options for discouraging and addressing research misconduct and detrimental research practices. The sustainability of the scientific enterprise, both as a body of practice and as a legitimate, authoritative contributor to societal ends, depends in no small part on putting best practices to work across the entire system.
|
From page 16... ...
However, as experience has accumulated with various forms of research misconduct, detrimental research practices, and other forms of misconduct, as subsequent empirical research has revealed more about the nature of scientific misconduct, and because technological and social changes have altered the environment in which research is conducted, it is clear that the framework established more than two decades ago needs to be updated. In order to develop more robust approaches to ensuring research integrity in the current research environment, it is necessary to revisit some of the issues addressed in Responsible Science.
|
From page 17... ...
. Some of the phenomena that have driven this narrative, in addition to the regular appearance of highly visible research misconduct cases, include growing evidence that half or more of the published results in some fields are not reproducible, the remarkable growth in the number of retractions of journal articles, and the appearance of new forms of detrimental research practices such as journals that charge authors to publish but appear to do no quality control.
|
From page 18... ...
Research takes place within particular contexts that can have a powerful influence on the productivity and applicability of research both within science and in the broader society. These methods and contexts have been changing rapidly over the past two decades; this also has created new challenges to upholding research integrity.
|
From page 19... ...
The organizational model for academic research is shifting, with the results perhaps most visible in biomedicine: larger research groups, lower success rates on grants, a growing population of graduate students and postdoctoral fellows who are less likely to attain tenure-track or other independent research positions than previous generations, and the greater reliance of researcher sala
|
From page 20... ...
New forms of scientific publication pose challenges to traditional peer review systems.1 Examples include non-peer-reviewed web publications that are widely available, "publication" on personal web pages, and rapid publication with continuously updated reviews. The emergence of research based on computer analyses of massive datasets raises questions about access to both the data and the computer code used to analyze the data and about the allocation of credit to those who collect, curate, and disseminate data and to those who create software and programs that perform scientific analysis on the datasets.
|
From page 21... ...
Retractions and other indicators related to research misconduct and detrimental research practices are on the rise, and there are new mechanisms for communicating cases and trends. Policy reports on research integrity are emerging from a variety of international groups and individual countries and from the large international community of scholars, educators, and other practitioners concerned with these issues.
|
From page 22... ...
What can be learned from institutional and journal experiences with current procedures for handling allegations of misconduct in science? • What should the definition of research misconduct include?
|
From page 23... ...
Box 1-2 contains further information about terminology used in the study. 2 Although this report contains some discussion of federal regulations covering the treatment of human research subjects and how this regulatory framework interacts with implementation of the federal government's research misconduct policy, the committee considered institutional review boards and other elements of human subjects protections to be outside the appropriate scope of its findings and recommendations.
|
From page 24... ...
Research misconduct: The 1992 report defined research misconduct as fab rication, falsification, and plagiarism (FFP) , and the Office of Science and Technol ogy Policy adopted FFP as the unified federal definition in 2000.
|
From page 25... ...
policy, the federal research misconduct definition will be specified as such. Detrimental research practices: Detrimental research practices are research practices other than FFP that are clearly detrimental to the research process, as explained more fully in Chapter 4.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.