首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Soil, Sediment and Water >Deception and Fraud in the Publication of Scientific Research: Are There Solutions?
【24h】

Deception and Fraud in the Publication of Scientific Research: Are There Solutions?

机译:科学研究出版物中的欺骗与欺诈:是否有解决方案?

获取原文
           

摘要

A number of events in the U.S. and abroad have refocused the scientific community on historical issues of whether, and how, integrity of our technical literature can be assured. Solutions to this problem are neither simple nor certain. Professional societies have addressed scientific misconduct, and effective responses by the research community will require cooperation of scientific publications. While the incidence of scientific fraud is difficult to estimate with precision and certainly varies with discipline, identified and publicized recent cases beg attention from editorial boards. Several egregious cases are described. The peer review system serves the function of examination and critique by scientists in relevant disciplines to assess submitted papers prior to publication. There is even a developing literature and several specific journals dedicated to the subject of fraud, professional integrity and ways to monitor or correct existing conditions. Underlying the field of professional and scientific publication is a fundamental assumption that data are real and that research actually occurred. Typically, the process is “blind” in both directions, although some journals permit “author-directed” reviews. A reviewer’s responsibilities include ensuring that text properly reflects data, that tables and figures are necessary/appropriate, and that conclusions fairly and reasonably reflect results and the body of information. Thus, existing peer review systems probably cannot detect anything but the most obvious fraud. In addition to imposing or perpetuating stringent review protocols, journals also can amend author guidelines to speak explicitly about publishing requirements. Cases of properly documented fraud warrant immediate public announcement, followed by official withdrawal or retraction. Reflection on these issues led editors of one journal to institute changes in editorial policies and develop a code of ethics for authors, reviewers, and editors. Prevention of dishonest research is already difficult, and we should ensure that this remains the case. Editors should formally commit reviewers/authors to ethical conduct in technical publications prior to publication and review.
机译:美国和国外发生的许多事件使科学界重新关注了历史问题,这些历史问题可以确保以及如何确保我们技术文献的完整性。解决这个问题既不简单也不肯定。专业协会已经解决了科学不端行为,研究界的有效回应将需要科学出版物的合作。尽管难以准确估计科学欺诈的发生率,并且当然会因学科而异,但已发现和公开的近期案件却引起编辑委员会的关注。描述了几种严重的情况。同行评审系统具有相关学科的科学家的审查和评论功能,可以在发表论文之前对提交的论文进行评估。甚至还有发展中的文献和一些专门的期刊,专门讨论欺诈,专业诚信以及监控或纠正现有状况的方法。专业和科学出版领域的基础是一个基本假设,即数据是真实的并且研究实际上已经进行。通常,该过程在两个方向都是“盲目的”,尽管某些期刊允许“作者指导”的评论。审阅者的职责包括确保文本正确地反映数据,表格/数字是必要/适当的,并且结论公平合理地反映结果和信息主体。因此,现有的同行评审系统可能无法检测到最明显的欺诈行为。除了强加或维持严格的审阅协议外,期刊还可以修改作者指南,以明确地谈论出版要求。记录正确的欺诈案需要立即公开宣布,然后正式撤回或撤回。对这些问题的反思促使一本期刊的编辑者制定了编辑政策的变化,并为作者,审稿人和编辑制定了道德守则。防止不诚实的研究已经很困难,我们应该确保情况依然如此。在发表和审阅之前,编辑应正式要求审阅者/作者遵守技术出版物中的道德行为。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号