Description
- Fully revised and updated text which explains the various forms of scientific misconduct.
- New chapters include hot topics such as Ethics of the Pharmaceutical Industry, The Responsibility of Science to the Environment and Summary of Ethics Guidelines of STEM Professional Societies.
- Provides the necessary tools to lead students in the discussion of topical controversies.
- Includes descriptions of real ethical case studies, a number of which are new for the Second Edition.
- This book is applicable to any science and any level of education.
Table of Contents
Scientific misconduct in research: What is it, why does it happen, and how do we identify 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窶冱 dilemma.
What are the penalties for scientific misconduct?
- Human and animal subjects.
What is peer review窶冱 role in scientific misconduct?
- Revisiting Vlad and Frankie.
- Can peer reviewers be unethical?
- 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.
What constitutes responsible conduct from the point+A76 of view of human and animal subjects in research?
The ethics of the pharmaceutical industry.
Science and the public.
The role of government in scientific misconduct?
The responsibility of science to the environment.
Is there some research that shouldn窶冲 be done because of threats the results may pose to society?
Summary of ethics guidelines of STEM professional societies.
Can Scientific misconduct be prevented?
- Intentional negligence in acknowledgment of previous work.
- Deliberate fabrication of data.
- Deliberate omission of known data that doesn窶冲 agree with hypotheses.
- Passing another researcher窶冱 data as one窶冱 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窶� work.
- Wrapping up.
- Case Studies.
- Darwin and Wallace.
- Rangaswamy Srinivasan窶天ISX 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窶添ale patent dispute.
- VIOXX®.
Index.
![Appleton's CyclopÃ]dia of American Biography](../images/goods/ar/work/imgdatag/10239/1023939738.JPG)
