• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

对研究行为中不道德行为的惩处。

Punishment for unethical behavior in the conduct of research.

作者信息

Wenger N S, Korenman S G, Berk R, Liu H

机构信息

Department of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles 90095-1736, USA.

出版信息

Acad Med. 1998 Nov;73(11):1187-94. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199811000-00018.

DOI:10.1097/00001888-199811000-00018
PMID:9834703
Abstract

PURPOSE

To investigate the perceptions of scientists and institutional representatives (IRs) to the National Institutes of Health's Office of Research Integrity concerning appropriate punishment for unethical research behavior.

METHOD

In 1994-95, 606 scientists and 91 IRs rated the ethical behaviors of and suggested appropriate punishments for protagonists in randomly generated scenarios describing scientific research behaviors. The authors evaluated the relationships of the suggested punishments to the protagonists' behaviors and characteristics, and compared recommendations of the scientists and IRs.

RESULTS

The respondents suggested punishments for 80% of the scenarios that were rated unethical. Punishments were more often prescribed for behaviors rated more unethical and for repeat offenders. The type of punishment was related to the protagonist's academic status and the nature of the unethical behavior. IRs proposed more and different punishments than did scientists.

CONCLUSION

Scientists and IRs proposed that most unethical research behaviors be punished. The decision to punish depended on the unethical level of the behavior. The type of punishment depended on the aims: correcting the wrong, rehabilitation, or sanction. Variation in the respondents' selections of punishments and the IRs' greater propensity to punish suggest that scientists committing similar ethical violations may receive different punishments. Explicit consideration of which punishment is merited under what circumstances should be undertaken by the scientific community.

摘要

目的

调查科学家和机构代表对美国国立卫生研究院研究诚信办公室针对不道德研究行为的适当惩罚措施的看法。

方法

在1994 - 1995年期间,606名科学家和91名机构代表对随机生成的描述科研行为的场景中主角的道德行为进行评分,并建议适当的惩罚措施。作者评估了所建议的惩罚措施与主角行为及特征之间的关系,并比较了科学家和机构代表的建议。

结果

对于80%被评为不道德的场景,受访者都建议了惩罚措施。对于被评为更不道德的行为以及惯犯,更常规定要进行惩罚。惩罚类型与主角的学术地位以及不道德行为的性质有关。机构代表比科学家提出了更多且不同的惩罚措施。

结论

科学家和机构代表提议对大多数不道德的研究行为进行惩罚。惩罚的决定取决于行为的不道德程度。惩罚类型取决于目的:纠正错误、改造或制裁。受访者在惩罚选择上的差异以及机构代表更强的惩罚倾向表明,犯有类似道德违规行为的科学家可能会受到不同的惩罚。科学界应明确考虑在何种情况下应给予何种惩罚。

相似文献

1
Punishment for unethical behavior in the conduct of research.对研究行为中不道德行为的惩处。
Acad Med. 1998 Nov;73(11):1187-94. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199811000-00018.
2
Evaluation of the research norms of scientists and administrators responsible for academic research integrity.对负责学术研究诚信的科学家和管理人员的研究规范进行评估。
JAMA. 1998 Jan 7;279(1):41-7. doi: 10.1001/jama.279.1.41.
3
The ethics of scientific research: an analysis of focus groups of scientists and institutional representatives.科学研究的伦理:对科学家和机构代表焦点小组的分析
J Investig Med. 1997 Aug;45(6):371-80.
4
Reporting unethical research behavior.报告不道德的研究行为。
Eval Rev. 1999 Oct;23(5):553-70. doi: 10.1177/0193841X9902300504.
5
Measuring consensus about scientific research norms.衡量对科学研究规范的共识。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2000 Jul;6(3):315-40. doi: 10.1007/s11948-000-0035-x.
6
Policing fraud and deceit: the legal aspects of misconduct in scientific inquiry.防范欺诈与欺骗:科学探究中不当行为的法律层面
J Infor Ethics. 1996 Spring;5(1):59-71.
7
Assessing the seriousness of research misconduct: considerations for sanction assignment.评估研究不当行为的严重性:制裁分配的考量因素。
Account Res. 2006 Apr-Jun;13(2):179-205. doi: 10.1080/08989620500440261.
8
Scientific misconduct: a form of white coat crime.科研不端行为:一种“白衣犯罪”形式。
J Pharm Law. 1993;2(1):15-34.
9
Research ethics. Query by Congress halts new policy.研究伦理。国会的质疑暂停了新政策。
Science. 2001 Mar 2;291(5509):1679-80. doi: 10.1126/science.291.5509.1679a.
10
Sociology. Scientific misconduct: do the punishments fit the crime?社会学。科研不端行为:处罚是否与罪行相称?
Science. 2008 Aug 8;321(5890):775. doi: 10.1126/science.1158052.

引用本文的文献

1
Redundant publications in surgery: a threat to patient safety?外科领域的重复发表:对患者安全的威胁?
Patient Saf Surg. 2008 Mar 19;2:6. doi: 10.1186/1754-9493-2-6.
2
Consensus and contention regarding redundant publications in clinical research: cross-sectional survey of editors and authors.临床研究中关于重复发表的共识与争议:对编辑和作者的横断面调查
J Med Ethics. 2003 Apr;29(2):109-14. doi: 10.1136/jme.29.2.109.
3
Measuring consensus about scientific research norms.衡量对科学研究规范的共识。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2000 Jul;6(3):315-40. doi: 10.1007/s11948-000-0035-x.