Scientific misconduct is now widely recognized as a genuine and significant problem for
contemporary science, but too often the participants in the research system—and those outside
who are affected by it-suffer from lack of clarity about what constitutes scientific misconduct.
Examples are presented in which questions of professional discourtesy, methodological disagreement, and political struggle are misunderstood as questions of honesty.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barinaga, M.1992. Who controls a researcher's files? Science256:1620-21.
2.
Koshland, D., Jr.1987. Fraud in science. Science235:141.
3.
LaFollette, M.1992. Stealing into print. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
4.
Palca, J.1991. Get-the-lead-out guru challenged. Science253:842-44.
5.
—. 1992a. Lead researcher confronts accusers in public hearing . Science256:437-38.
6.
—. 1992b. Panel clears Needleman of misconduct. Science256:1369
7.
Woolf, P.1988. Deception in scientific research. Juritnetrics Journal29:67-95.
