Providing the tools necessary for robust debate, Ethics in Science: Ethical Misconduct in Scientific Research explains various forms of scientific misconduct and describes ethical controversies that have occurred in research.
The first part of the book includes a description of a variety of ethical violations, why they occur, how they are handled, and what can be done to prevent them along with a discussion of the peer-review process. The second part of the book presents real-life case studies that review the known facts, allowing readers to decide for themselves whether an ethical violation has occurred and if so, what should be done.
Discussing the difference between bad science and bad ethics and how to prevent scientific misconduct, this book explains the various forms of scientific misconduct and provides resources for guided discussion of topical controversies.
Contents
Irresponsible conduct in research: What is it, why does it happen, and how do we identify it when it happens?
What constitutes scientific misconduct?
Authorship and intellectual property
Bad ethics vs. bad science
New results that prove old results wrong
The whistle-blower’s dilemma
Wrapping up
What happens to those who violate responsible conduct?
Human and animal subjects
Wrapping up
What is peer review’s role in responsible conduct in research?
Revisiting Vlad and Frankie
Can peer reviewers be unethical?
Wrapping up
What effect on the public does scientific misconduct have?
MMR and autism
Climategate
HIV vaccine
Animal rights groups
Cold fusion
Bernard Kettlewell
Electromagnetic field and high-tension power lines
Fracking and pollution
Wrapping up
What constitutes responsible conduct from the point of view of human/animal subjects in research?
Can intervention or interference by the federal government result in research misconducp>Can we prevent misconduct in research?
Intentional negligence in acknowledgment of previous work
Deliberate fabrication of data
Deliberate omission of known data that doesn’t agree with hypotheses
Passing another researcher’s data as one’s own
Publication of results without consent of all the researchers
Failure to acknowledge all the researchers who performed the work
Conflict-of-interest issues
Repeated publication of too-similar results
Breach of confidentiality
Misrepresenting others’ work
Wrapping up
Case Studies
Darwin and Wallace
Rangaswamy Srinivasan–VISX patent dispute
Schwartz and Mirkin
Corey and Woodward
Córdova, Scripps Research Institute, and Stockholm University
La Clair and hexacyclinol
Woodward and quinine
DNA
David Baltimore and Teresa Imanishi-Kari
John Fenn–Yale patent dispute
VIOXX®
Index
