Collegial Ethics: Supporting Our Colleagues

Kuhar, Michael J.; Cross, Dorthie

doi:10.1007/s11948-012-9364-9

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Bird has reported that even mentors may demonstrate “a misuse of power” (Bird, 2001 ). In contrast, Kuhar and Cross have pointed out that “The goal of collegial ethics is to actively support our colleagues … the golden rule” (Kuhar and Cross, 2013 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Authorship Issues and Conflict in the U.S. Academic Chemical Community

Seeman

House²

2015

Accountability in Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A survey on credit issues and related “responsible conduct of research” (RCR) behaviors was conducted with academic chemists in Ph.D. granting institutions in the U.S. Six hundred faculty members responded. Fifty percent of the respondents reported not receiving appropriate credit for contributions they had made to projects the results of which had been published, including when they themselves were students. Thirty percent of these individuals discussed this lack of credit with the “offending” individual, and as a consequence of those discussions, a small percentage of individuals were provided either co-authorship or an acknowledgment. The majority who did not enter into a discussion with the “offending” individual reported two primary reasons for not doing so: that they “could not imagine any good coming from such a conversation” and “I was afraid of being in a compromised situation.” A discussion of relationship asymmetry in the academic setting is provided. Confronting one’s colleague regarding credit is compared with whistleblowing, and the possible consequences of blacklisting are discussed. A number of recommendations for minimizing authorship disputes are provided.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%