SSOAR Logo
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Deutsch 
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Einloggen
SSOAR ▼
  • Home
  • Über SSOAR
  • Leitlinien
  • Veröffentlichen auf SSOAR
  • Kooperieren mit SSOAR
    • Kooperationsmodelle
    • Ablieferungswege und Formate
    • Projekte
  • Kooperationspartner
    • Informationen zu Kooperationspartnern
  • Informationen
    • Möglichkeiten für den Grünen Weg
    • Vergabe von Nutzungslizenzen
    • Informationsmaterial zum Download
  • Betriebskonzept
Browsen und suchen Dokument hinzufügen OAI-PMH-Schnittstelle
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Download PDF
Volltext herunterladen

(55.25 KB)

Zitationshinweis

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

Export für Ihre Literaturverwaltung

Bibtex-Export
Endnote-Export

Statistiken anzeigen
Weiterempfehlen
  • Share via E-Mail E-Mail
  • Share via Facebook Facebook
  • Share via Bluesky Bluesky
  • Share via Reddit reddit
  • Share via Linkedin LinkedIn
  • Share via XING XING

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)

[Zeitschriftenartikel]

Fangerau, Heiner

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 stu... mehr

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.... weniger

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
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-009-0284-3

Status
Postprint; begutachtet (peer reviewed)

Lizenz
PEER Licence Agreement (applicable only to documents from PEER project)


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Impressum  |  Betriebskonzept  |  Datenschutzerklärung
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.
 

 


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Impressum  |  Betriebskonzept  |  Datenschutzerklärung
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.