Research ethics, publication ethics and the dialectics of scientists trying not to behave badly: a comment on the advantages and limitations of Twin Assessment of Clinical Trials (TACT)

Übernahme per Copy & Paste
Bibtex-Export
Endnote-Export

[Zeitschriftenartikel]

Fangerau, Heiner

(55 KByte)

Bitte beziehen Sie sich beim Zitieren dieses Dokumentes immer auf folgenden Persistent Identifier (PID):http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-203563

Abstract	Aim: This comment addresses conflicts of interest in the publication of research results. Subject and Methods: Based on the concept of values in science, the problem of scientific misconduct related to publishing research results is treated hermeneutically. Franz Porzsolt’s approach to assessing studies and the implications for solving conflicts of interest are evaluated. Results: It is argued that conflicts of interest reflect the difficulty of balancing values in science and that science would become arbitrary and worthless for sponsors of research if it lacked its traditional values. Conclusion: Keeping scientific values and coping with conflicts of interest are essential for the future credibility and accountability of scientific endeavors. The communitarian approach to Twin Assessment of Clinical Studies might answer both demands.
Klassifikation	Wissenschaftssoziologie, Wissenschaftsforschung, Technikforschung, Techniksoziologie
Freie Schlagwörter	Values; Publication ethics; Conflict of interest
Sprache Dokument	Englisch
Publikationsjahr	2009
Seitenangabe	S. 433-434
Zeitschriftentitel	Journal of Public Health, 17 (2009) 6
DOI	http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10389-009-0284-3
Status	Postprint; begutachtet (peer reviewed)
Lizenz	PEER Licence Agreement (applicable only to documents from PEER project)