298 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15991409)
1. The discipline of science: law or profession?
Davis M
Account Res; 1990 Oct; 1(2):137-45. PubMed ID: 15991409
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Honesty and method.
Schmaus W
Account Res; 1990 Oct; 1(2):147-53. PubMed ID: 15991410
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Research misconduct and the scientific process: continuing quality improvement.
Koppelman-White E
Account Res; 2006; 13(3):225-46. PubMed ID: 17124759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. From Baltimore to Bell Labs: reflections on two decades of debate about scientific misconduct.
Resnik DB
Account Res; 2003; 10(2):123-35. PubMed ID: 14577424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Character and the ethical conduct of research.
Pellegrino ED
Account Res; 1992; 2(1):1-11. PubMed ID: 11651456
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. Which ethics for science and public policy?
Irving DN; Shamoo AE
Account Res; 1993; 3(2-3):77-100. PubMed ID: 11652298
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. A new approach to assessing ethical conduct in scientific work.
Helton-Fauth W; Gaddis B; Scott G; Mumford M; Devenport L; Connelly S; Brown R
Account Res; 2003; 10(4):205-28. PubMed ID: 14989284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Your mission is ... academic fraud and theft are a growing problem as researchers struggle to keep to an ethical code that is never talked about. Now some of science's top names are taking up the fight to keep the profession honest.
Cohen P
New Sci; 1999 Jul; 162(2193):38-41. PubMed ID: 11657935
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. On being an authentic scientist.
Smith ML
IRB; 1992; 14(2):1-4. PubMed ID: 11651243
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Fraud investigation.
Mosher EH; Blair C; Silver GA
Science; 1982 Mar; 215(4539):1456, 1458. PubMed ID: 11643730
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Teaching scientific integrity.
Gifford F
Centen Rev; 1994; 38(2):297-314. PubMed ID: 11656760
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Encouraging accountability in research: a pilot assessment of training efforts.
Mastroianni AC; Kahn JP
Account Res; 1999; 7(1):85-100. PubMed ID: 11657564
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Inappropriate authorship in collaborative science research.
Pennock RT
Public Aff Q; 1996 Oct; 10(4):379-93. PubMed ID: 11654653
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Scientific misconduct in academia: a survey and analysis of applicable law.
Sise CB
San Diego Law Rev; 1991; 28(2):401-28. PubMed ID: 11651628
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. Scientific misconduct: tip of an iceberg or the elephant in the room?
Luther F
J Dent Res; 2010 Dec; 89(12):1364-7. PubMed ID: 20940367
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. Medical editors to take tougher line.
Coghlan A
New Sci; 2004 Mar 6-12; 181(2437):11. PubMed ID: 15139349
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Misconduct and social control in science: issues, problems, solutions.
Fox MF; Braxton JM
J Higher Educ; 1994; 65(3):373-83. PubMed ID: 11653368
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
18. An introduction to research ethics.
Friedman PJ
Sci Eng Ethics; 1996 Oct; 2(4):443-56. PubMed ID: 11657731
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Assessing the seriousness of research misconduct: considerations for sanction assignment.
Keranen L
Account Res; 2006; 13(2):179-205. PubMed ID: 16830407
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Ambiguity, trust, and the responsible conduct of research.
Grinnell F
Sci Eng Ethics; 1999 Apr; 5(2):205-14. PubMed ID: 11657858
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
