- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Research misconduct: Why are definitions so elusive?
Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (4):443-444 (1999)
Abstract
This letter is a response to David Guston’s paper “Changing Explanatory Frameworks in the U.S. Government’s Attempt to Define Scientific Misconduct” which appeared in a special issue of Science and Engineering Ethics on Scientific MisconductOther Versions
No versions found
My notes
Similar books and articles
Commentary on “changing explanatory frameworks in the U.S. government’s attempts to define research misconduct”. [REVIEW]Margaret Dale - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):158-160.
Commentary on “changing explanatory frameworks in the U.S. government’s attempt to define research misconduct”. [REVIEW]Allan C. Shipp - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):155-157.
Changing explanatory frameworks in the U.S. government’s attempt to define research misconduct.David H. Guston - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):137-154.
Development of international guidelines for research ethics: A commentary on "scientific misconduct: Present problems and future trends".Matthias Kaiser - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):293-298.
Commentary on "scientific misconduct: Present problems and future trends" (b. mishkin).Debra M. Parrish - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):299-301.
Misconduct in science and the German law.Stefanic Stegemann-Bochl - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):57-62.
Commentary on “the history and future of the office of research integrity: Scientific misconduct and beyond” (c. pascal).Kenneth D. Pimple - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):203-204.
The american experience: Lessons learned. [REVIEW]Lawrence J. Rhoades - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):95-107.
Scientific misconduct: Ongoing developments.Raymond Spier & Stephanie J. Bird - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (1):3-4.
Analytics
Added to PP
2009-01-28
Downloads
46 (#480,830)
6 months
16 (#187,891)
2009-01-28
Downloads
46 (#480,830)
6 months
16 (#187,891)
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
The Subjective Side of Science: A Philosophical Inquiry into the Psychology of the Apollo Moon Scientists.Ian I. Mitroff - 1976 - Science and Society 40 (1):123-124.
Changing explanatory frameworks in the U.S. government’s attempt to define research misconduct.David H. Guston - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):137-154.
Commentary on “changing explanatory frameworks in the U.S. government’s attempts to define research misconduct”. [REVIEW]Margaret Dale - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):158-160.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-667477cd97-wmc4m dc2