Koppelman-White Elysa
Department of Philosophy, Oakland University, 336 O'Dowd Hall, Rochester, MI 48309, USA.
Account Res. 2006 Jul-Sep;13(3):225-46. doi: 10.1080/08989620600848611.
The response to research misconduct involves the attempt to regulate behavior through (a) creating and enforcing a rule and (b) ethics education. The roles of each must be shaped by considerations of the nature of scientific practice. Given the nature of science, the role of (a) must be limited in scope: both in the types of behavior it covers and in the level of intent that must be present for an allegation of misconduct to be proven. Since one important role of ethics education is to fill the gaps that regulatory rules leave open, it is this limitation in scope and its source in theoretical concerns that better reveals the type and kind of education needed. It is argued that much of the current ethics education falls short. Since the gaps left by the rule are largely due to theoretical concerns about the very nature of the scientific process and the nature of that process is constantly evolving, ethics education must focus more heavily on theory and must reach a wider audience. It is argued that ethics education can be more effective if it aims, in part, in creating a discipline-specific, constantly evolving standard of care.
(a)制定并执行规则,以及(b)开展道德教育。每项措施的作用都必须根据科学实践的性质来确定。鉴于科学的性质,(a)的作用在范围上必须受到限制:既要限制其涵盖的行为类型,也要限制在证明不当行为指控时必须存在的意图程度。由于道德教育的一个重要作用是填补监管规则留下的空白,正是这种范围上的限制及其在理论问题中的根源,更清楚地揭示了所需教育的类型和种类。有人认为,当前的许多道德教育都存在不足。由于规则留下的空白很大程度上是由于对科学过程的本质存在理论担忧,而该过程的本质在不断演变,道德教育必须更侧重于理论,并且必须面向更广泛的受众。有人认为,如果道德教育部分旨在建立特定学科、不断演变的护理标准,那么它会更有效。