Show simple item record

dc.creatorBuzzelli, Donald E.en
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-05T18:45:50Zen
dc.date.available2015-05-05T18:45:50Zen
dc.date.created1993-01-29en
dc.date.issued1993-01-29en
dc.identifier10.1126/science.8430300en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationScience. 1993 Jan 29; 259(5095): 584-585, 647-648.en
dc.identifier.issn0036-8075en
dc.identifier.urihttp://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=The+Definition+of+Misconduct+in+Science:+a+View+from+Nsf&title=Science.++&volume=259&issue=5095&pages=584-585&date=1993&au=Buzzelli,+Donald+E.en
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.8430300en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/741178en
dc.description.abstractConclusion: NSF [National Science Foundation] uses an open-ended definition that contains the phrase "other serious deviation from accepted practices." To date, this definition has worked successfully. One of its major advantages is that it leaves the agency the possibility of taking action when a case arises that is not on some short list of types of misconduct. It is legitimate to ask how NSF understands this definition, how it was applied in a major case, and what safeguards there are against abuse. If the Academy [National Academy of Sciences] panel had asked, it might have produced more helpful recommendations and might have advanced the discussion of this subject much more than it did. Those who work on misconduct cases will always need the guidance and insights of their colleagues in the broader scientific community. But those who wish to make useful policy recommendations also need the insights of those with day-to-day experience in this highly controversial area.en
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceBRL:KIE/38659en
dc.subjectAdvisory Committeesen
dc.subjectBiomedical Researchen
dc.subjectConfidentialityen
dc.subjectDeceptionen
dc.subjectEthicsen
dc.subjectFederal Governmenten
dc.subjectFrauden
dc.subjectGovernmenten
dc.subjectGovernment Regulationen
dc.subjectInterprofessional Relationsen
dc.subjectInvestigatorsen
dc.subjectMisconducten
dc.subjectPeer Reviewen
dc.subjectProfessional Ethicsen
dc.subjectRegulationen
dc.subjectResearchen
dc.subjectReviewen
dc.subjectScienceen
dc.subjectScientific Misconducten
dc.subjectSelf Regulationen
dc.subjectSexualityen
dc.subjectStudentsen
dc.subjectTerminologyen
dc.subjectUniversitiesen
dc.titleThe Definition of Misconduct in Science: A View From NSFen
dc.provenanceDigital citation created by the National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature at Georgetown University for the BIOETHICSLINE database, part of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics' Bioethics Information Retrieval Project funded by the United States National Library of Medicine.en
dc.provenanceDigital citation migrated from OpenText LiveLink Discovery Server database named NBIO hosted by the Bioethics Research Library to the DSpace collection BioethicsLine hosted by Georgetown University.en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Georgetown University Seal
©2009—2022 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885