155 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33399492)
1. "Choice-supportive bias" in science: Explanation and mitigation.
Kafaee M; Marhamati H; Gharibzadeh S
Account Res; 2021 Nov; 28(8):528-543. PubMed ID: 33399492
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Meta-assessment of bias in science.
Fanelli D; Costas R; Ioannidis JP
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A; 2017 Apr; 114(14):3714-3719. PubMed ID: 28320937
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Life After Research Misconduct.
Galbraith KL
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2017 Feb; 12(1):26-32. PubMed ID: 28220722
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Researchers' interpretations of research integrity: A qualitative study.
Shaw D; Satalkar P
Account Res; 2018; 25(2):79-93. PubMed ID: 29291621
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity.
Fanelli D; Costas R; Larivière V
PLoS One; 2015; 10(6):e0127556. PubMed ID: 26083381
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. How researchers perceive research misconduct in biomedicine and how they would prevent it: A qualitative study in a small scientific community.
Buljan I; Barać L; Marušić A
Account Res; 2018; 25(4):220-238. PubMed ID: 29637796
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Scientific misconduct as a dilemma for nursing.
Hawley DJ; Jeffers JM
Image J Nurs Sch; 1992; 24(1):51-5. PubMed ID: 1541472
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Scientific misconduct: three forms that directly harm others as the modus operandi of Mill's tyranny of the prevailing opinion.
Cabbolet MJ
Sci Eng Ethics; 2014 Mar; 20(1):41-54. PubMed ID: 23420468
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Lack of Improvement in Scientific Integrity: An Analysis of WoS Retractions by Chinese Researchers (1997-2016).
Lei L; Zhang Y
Sci Eng Ethics; 2018 Oct; 24(5):1409-1420. PubMed ID: 28889329
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. World Map of Scientific Misconduct.
Ataie-Ashtiani B
Sci Eng Ethics; 2018 Oct; 24(5):1653-1656. PubMed ID: 28653166
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Suppression, bias, and selection in science: the case of cancer research.
Hess DJ
Account Res; 1999; 6(4):245-57. PubMed ID: 11657839
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Scientific misconduct and editorial and peer review processes.
Fox MF
J Higher Educ; 1994; 65(3):298-309. PubMed ID: 11653366
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Publication pressure and scientific misconduct in medical scientists.
Tijdink JK; Verbeke R; Smulders YM
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics; 2014 Dec; 9(5):64-71. PubMed ID: 25747691
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Scientific integrity in Brazil.
Lins L; Carvalho FM
J Bioeth Inq; 2014 Sep; 11(3):283-7. PubMed ID: 24952507
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Difference in scientists' discourse about scientific fraud and impropriety.
John ID
Aust Psychol; 1991 Jul; 26(2):120-2. PubMed ID: 16134264
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. The hidden side of animal cognition research: Scientists' attitudes toward bias, replicability and scientific practice.
Farrar BG; Ostojić L; Clayton NS
PLoS One; 2021; 16(8):e0256607. PubMed ID: 34464406
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Ethical aspects in medical publishing in Belgium.
Moreels TG
Acta Gastroenterol Belg; 2018; 81(1):45-48. PubMed ID: 29562377
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Males are overrepresented among life science researchers committing scientific misconduct.
Fang FC; Bennett JW; Casadevall A
mBio; 2013 Jan; 4(1):e00640-12. PubMed ID: 23341553
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Scientific misconduct: Chinese journals pledge crackdown.
Wang J
Science; 1999 Mar; 283(5407):1427. PubMed ID: 11645143
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. Rules to be adopted for publishing a scientific paper.
Picardi N
Ann Ital Chir; 2016; 87():1-3. PubMed ID: 28474609
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
