Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment

Mayer, Tony; Steneck, Nicholas H.

doi:10.1142/8102

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…NOAA has a comprehensive policy to develop a culture of scientific integrity, from pure research to policy advice and development (NOAA 2011) as has the US Environment Protection Agency (EPA 2012). Similarly, the Canadian Government has in place a Model Policy on Scientific Integrity (Government of Canada 2019) and a Roadmap for Open Science (Chief Science Advisor of Canada, 2020), the principles of which are consistent with those of NOAA and other professional science bodies (Mayer and Steneck 2011; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine 2017; American Chemical Society 2017; Kretser et al 2019). Following Kretser et al (2019), evidence-based policy interests may have legitimate roles to play in influencing aspects of the research process, but those roles should not interfere with scientific integrity and the questions to be examined.…”

Section: Ways Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific integrity, public policy and water governance in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia

Colloff

Grafton

Williams

2021

Australasian Journal of Water Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the impediments to scientific integrity with an analysis of the water science-policy interface for the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB), Australia. We highlight the dangers to the public interest of 'administrative capture' of science, whereby scientists are incentivised to narrow or close down the scientific questions asked, the debates on evidence and the scientific dialogue so to support predetermined policy actions. Administrative capture of science is not intended to be objective or disinterested and contributes to a diminution of trust in science and scientists. Using an integrative theoretical framework for analysis of the different stances taken by scientists in science-policy interactions, we show how scientists as Issue Advocates have sought to limit debate and the options available in relation to water reform in the MDB. We provide six possible actions to reduce administrative capture that encourages scientists to become Issue Advocates. These actions include procedural, professional, evaluative, judicial, instrumental and external controls that support scientific integrity by individuals and agencies that use and/or undertake publicly funded research.

show abstract

Section: Ways Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific integrity, public policy and water governance in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia

Colloff

Grafton

Williams

2021

Australasian Journal of Water Resources

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…СОРЕ також розробив «Міжнародні стандарти для редакторів наукових видань» (International standards for editors) та «Міжнародні стандарти для авторів публікацій результатів наукових досліджень» (International standards for authors). Ці документи були рекомендовані міжнародному науковому співтовариству після проведення в 2010 році в Сингапурі 2-ї Всесвітньої конференції з питань інтеграції наукових досліджень, де за участю міжнародних експертів із різних галузей науки (біології, гуманітарних дисциплін, математики, медицини, філософії та інших) обговорювалися питання публікаційної етики [4].…”

Section: результати та обговорення здобутих данихunclassified

International organizations and their experience in dealing with publication ethics

Marushko¹

2016

Reproductive Endocrinology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…International standards for editors and authors, from the Second World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, 2010 published in Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment [144,145] Montreal Statement on Responsibilities of Individual and Institutional Partners in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations [146] Singapore Statement on Research Integrity [9] Wiley Graf C. et al . Best Practice Guidelines on Publication Ethics: A Publisher's Perspective [147] Wiley Copyright FAQs [27] WMA World Medical Association: Declaration of Helsinki [32] …”

Section: Essaymentioning

confidence: 99%

Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics: A Publisher's Perspective, 2nd Edition

Graf

Deakin

Docking³

et al. 2014

Advanced Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wiley has updated its publishing ethics guidelines, first published in 2006. These new guidelines provide guidance, resources, and practical advice on ethical concerns that arise in academic publishing for editors, authors, and researchers, among other audiences. New guidance is included about whistle blowers, animal research, clinical research, and clinical trial registration, addressing cultural differences, human rights, and confidentiality. The guidelines are uniquely interdisciplinary, and were reviewed by 24 editors and experts chosen from the wide range of communities that Wiley serves. These guidelines are also published in: Headache, International Journal of Clinical Practice, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Social Science Quarterly, and on the website http://exchanges.wiley.com/ethicsguidelines.

show abstract

Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Scientific integrity, public policy and water governance in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia

Scientific integrity, public policy and water governance in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia

International organizations and their experience in dealing with publication ethics

Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics: A Publisher's Perspective, 2nd Edition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About