Tendances de la recherche sur l'intégrité scientifique
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.20416/LSRSPS.V9I1.1Mots-clés :
Intégrité scientifique, Manquements à l'intégrité scientifique, État de l'artRésumé
Plus d’une trentaine d’années après la création des premières structures dédiées à sa promotion, l’intégrité scientifique s’est progressivement constituée en tant que thématique de recherche à part entière. Aujourd’hui, une communauté scientifique et académique est réunie autour de cet objet, comme en témoignent la publication d’un nombre croissant d’articles, la création de revues spécialisées ou encore l’organisation de conférences spécifiquement dédiées. Néanmoins, rares sont les travaux qui ont cherché à proposer une vue d’ensemble de la littérature académique relative à l’intégrité scientifique. C’est dans cette perspective que cet état de l’art s’inscrit et entend apporter une contribution. Avec la volonté de rendre compte des principales tendances de la recherche en la matière, nous avons principalement ciblé dans ce travail des articles, des commentaires ou encore quelques documents institutionnels qui ont cherché à approfondir la compréhension que l’on a de l’intégrité scientifique, à explorer les diverses façons de la promouvoir, à mieux cerner l’occurrence des manquements qui y sont liés, ou encore à proposer une lecture de ces questions sous un angle spécifique. Certaines des thématiques qui sont abordées dans cet état de l’art sont incontournables dans le paysage de la recherche et font l’objet d’une attention marquée depuis longtemps, à l’image de l’étude des manquements à l’intégrité scientifique. D’autres, à l’instar des études historiques de l’intégrité scientifique, représentent des pistes de recherche un peu moins explorées mais dont l’intérêt nous semble assez important pour appeler à davantage de développements.
Références
Abritis, A., Marcus, A., & Oransky, I. (2021). An “alarming” and “exceptionally high” rate of COVID-19 retractions? Accountability in Research, 28(1), 58‑59.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1793675
ALLEA. (2017). The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity.
https://www.allea.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/
ALLEA-European-Code-of-Conduct-for-Research-Integrity-2017.pdf
Allen, C., & Mehler, D. M. A. (2019). Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond. PLOS Biology, 17(5), e3000246.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000246
Ampollini, I., & Bucchi, M. (2020). When Public Discourse Mirrors Academic Debate : Research Integrity in the Media. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(1), 451‑474.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00103-5
Andersen, L. E., & Wray, K. B. (2019). Detecting errors that result in retractions. Social Studies of Science, 49(6), 942‑954.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312719872008
Anderson, C., Nugent, K., & Peterson, C. (2021). Academic Journal Retractions and the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Primary Care & Community Health, 12, 1‑6.
https://doi.org/10.1177/21501327211015592
Anderson, M. S., Horn, A. S., Risbey, K. R., Ronning, E. A., De Vries, R., & Martinson, B. C. (2007). What do mentoring and training in the responsible conduct of research have to do with scientists’ misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-funded scientists. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 82(9), 853‑860.
https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f764c
Anderson, M. S., Ronning, E. A., De Vries, R., & Martinson, B. C. (2007). The Perverse Effects of Competition on Scientists’ Work and Relationships. Science and Engineering Ethics, 13(4), 437‑461.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-007-9042-5
Anderson, M. S., Shaw, M. A., Steneck, N. H., Konkle, E., & Kamata, T. (2013). Research Integrity and Misconduct in the Academic Profession. In M. B. Paulsen (Éd.), Higher Education : Handbook of Theory and Research : Volume 28 (Vol. 28, p. 217‑261). Springer Netherlands.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5836-0_5
Antes, A. L., Murphy, S. T., Waples, E. P., Mumford, M. D., Brown, R. P., Connelly, S., & Devenport, L. D. (2009). A Meta-Analysis of Ethics Instruction Effectiveness in the Sciences. Ethics & behavior, 19(5), 379‑402.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10508420903035380
Aubert Bonn, N., & Pinxten, W. (2019). A Decade of Empirical Research on Research Integrity : What Have We (Not) Looked At? Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 14(4), 338‑352.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264619858534
Bagdasarian, N., Cross, G. B., & Fisher, D. (2020). Rapid publications risk the integrity of science in the era of COVID-19. BMC Medicine, 18(1), 192.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-020-01650-6
Bedeian, A. G., Taylor, S. G., & Miller, A. N. (2010). Management science on the credibility bubble : Cardinal sins and various misdemeanors. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(4), 715‑725.
https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2010.56659889
Bedessem, B. (2020). Sciences participatives : Enjeux épistémologiques. Lato Sensu: Revue de la Société de philosophie des sciences, 7(1), 1‑16.
https://doi.org/10.20416/LSRSPS.V7I1.1
Beisiegel, U. (2010). Research integrity and publication ethics. Atherosclerosis, 212(2), 383‑385.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2010.01.050
Bhopal, R., Rankin, J., McColl, E., Thomas, L., Kaner, E., Stacy, R., Pearson, P., Vernon, B., & Rodgers, H. (1997). The vexed question of authorship : Views of researchers in a British medical faculty. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 314(7086), 1009‑1012. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.314.7086.1009
Boseley, S., & Davey, M. (2020). Covid-19 : Lancet retracts paper that halted hydroxychloroquine trials. The Guardian.
Bouter, L. (2020). What Research Institutions Can Do to Foster Research Integrity. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(4), 2363‑2369.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00178-5
Bowe, B. J., Oshita, T., Terracina-Hartman, C., & Chao, W.-C. (2014). Framing of climate change in newspaper coverage of the East Anglia e-mail scandal. Public Understanding of Science, 23(2), 157‑169.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662512449949
Brainard, J., & You, J. (2018). What a massive database of retracted papers reveals about science publishing’s ‘death penalty’.
Bramstedt, K. A. (2020). The carnage of substandard research during the COVID-19 pandemic : A call for quality. Journal of Medical Ethics, 46(12), 803‑807.
https://doi.org/10.1136/medethics-2020-106494
Brand, A., Allen, L., Altman, M., Hlava, M., & Scott, J. (2015). Beyond authorship : Attribution, contribution, collaboration, and credit. Learned Publishing, 28(2), 151‑155.
https://doi.org/10.1087/20150211
Bungener, M., & Hadchouel, M. (2012). Rôle des institutions dans la gestion de la fraude scientifique : L’exemple de la Délégation à l’intégrité scientifique de l’Inserm. La Presse Médicale, 41(9, Part 1), 841‑846.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lpm.2012.02.050
Carvallo, S. (2019). L’éthique de la recherche entre réglementation et réflexivité. Revue d’anthropologie des connaissances, Vol. 13, N°2(2), 299‑326.
https://doi.org/10.3917/rac.043.0299
Consoli, L. (2006). Scientific misconduct and science ethics : A case study based approach. Science and Engineering Ethics, 12(3), 533‑541.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-006-0051-6
Coutellec, L. (2019). Penser l’indissociabilité de l’éthique de la recherche, de l’intégrité scientifique et de la responsabilité sociale des sciences. Revue d’anthropologie des connaissances, Vol. 13, N°2(2), 381‑398.
https://doi.org/10.3917/rac.043.0381
Danish Committee on Research Misconduct. (2017). Act no. 383 on Research Misconduct etc.
Daston, L., & Galison, P. (2010). Objectivity. Zone Books.
De Winter, J. (2016). Interests and epistemic integrity in science : A new framework to assess interest influences in scientific research processes. Lexington Books.
Dinis-Oliveira, R. J. (2020). COVID-19 research : Pandemic versus “paperdemic”, integrity, values and risks of the “speed science”. Forensic Sciences Research, 5(2), 174‑187.
https://doi.org/10.1080/20961790.2020.1767754
Divers. (2015). Charte nationale de déontologie des métiers de la recherhe.
DORA. (2012). San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment.
Dubois, J. M., & Dueker, J. M. (2009). Teaching and Assessing the Responsible Conduct of Research : A Delphi Consensus Panel Report. The Journal of Research Administration, 40(1), 49‑70.
Eisen, M. B., Akhmanova, A., Behrens, T. E., & Weigel, D. (2020). Publishing in the time of COVID-19. eLife, 9, e57162. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.57162
Else, H. (2020). How a torrent of COVID science changed research publishing—In seven charts. Nature, 588(7839), 553‑553.
https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03564-y
Fabbri, A., Lai, A., Grundy, Q., & Bero, L. A. (2018). The Influence of Industry Sponsorship on the Research Agenda : A Scoping Review. American Journal of Public Health, 108(11), e9‑e16.
https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2018.304677
Fanelli, D. (2009). How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data. PLOS ONE, 4(5), e5738.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0005738
Fanelli, D. (2010). Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists’ Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data. PLOS ONE, 5(4), e10271.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010271
Fanelli, D. (2012). The black, the white and the grey areas—Towards an international and interdisciplinary definition of scientific misconduct. In N. Steneck & T. Mayer (Éds.), Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment (p. 79‑90). World Scientific.
Fanelli, D. (2013). Why Growing Retractions Are (Mostly) a Good Sign. PLOS Medicine, 10(12), e1001563.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001563
Fanelli, D. (2018). Opinion : Is science really facing a reproducibility crisis, and do we need it to? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(11), 2628‑2631.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708272114
Fanelli, D., Costas, R., & Larivière, V. (2015). Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity. PLOS ONE, 10(6), e0127556.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127556
Fang, F. C., Bennett, J. W., & Casadevall, A. (2013). Males are overrepresented among life science researchers committing scientific misconduct. MBio, 4(1), e00640-00612.
https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00640-12
Fang, F. C., & Casadevall, A. (2011). Retracted Science and the Retraction Index. Infection and Immunity, 79(10), 3855‑3859.
https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.05661-11
Fang, F. C., Steen, R. G., & Casadevall, A. (2012). Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(42), 17028‑17033.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1212247109
Flynn Mogensen, J. (2020). Science Has an Ugly, Complicated Dark Side. And the Coronavirus Is Bringing It Out. Mother Jones.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/04/coronavirus-science-rush-to-publish-retractions/
Geggie, D. (2001). A survey of newly appointed consultants’ attitudes towards research fraud. Journal of Medical Ethics, 27(5), 344‑346.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.27.5.344
Godecharle, S., Nemery, B., & Dierickx, K. (2013a). Guidance on research integrity : No union in Europe. The Lancet, 381(9872), 1097‑1098.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60759-X
Godecharle, S., Nemery, B., & Dierickx, K. (2013b). Integrity Training : Conflicting Practices. Science, 340(6139), 1403‑1403.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.340.6139.1403-b
Godecharle, S., Nemery, B., & Dierickx, K. (2014). Heterogeneity in European research integrity guidance : Relying on values or norms? Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: JERHRE, 9(3), 79‑90.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264614540594
Grossberg, M. (2008). History and the Disciplining of Plagiarism. In C. Eisner & M. Vicinus, Originality, Imitation, and Plagiarism : Teaching Writing in the Digital Age. University of Michigan Press.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv65sxk1.17
Guerrini, C. J., Majumder, M. A., Lewellyn, M. J., & McGuire, A. L. (2018). Citizen science, public policy. Science, 361(6398), 134‑136.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar8379
Haran, J., & Kitzinger, J. (2009). Modest witnessing and managing the boundaries between science and the media : A case study of breakthrough and scandal. Public Understanding of Science, 18(6), 634‑652.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662509338324
Helgesson, G., & Eriksson, S. (2018). Revise the ICMJE Recommendations regarding authorship responsibility! Learned Publishing, 31(3), 267‑269.
https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1161
Henry, D. A., Hill, S. R., Doran, E., Newby, D. A., Henderson, K. M., Maguire, J., Stokes, B. J., Kerridge, I. H., McNeill, P. M., Day, R. O., & Macdonald, G. J. (2005). Medical specialists and pharmaceutical industry-sponsored research : A survey of the Australian experience. Medical Journal of Australia, 182(11).
Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). Bibliometrics : The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, 520(7548), 429‑431.
https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a
Hiney, M. (2015). Research Integrity : What it Means, Why it Is Important and How we Might Protect it. Science Europe Working Group on Research Integrity.
https://scienceeurope.org/media/dnwbwaux/briefing_paper_research_integrity_web.pdf
Holman, B., & Elliott, K. C. (2018). The promise and perils of industry-funded science. Philosophy Compass, 13(11), e12544.
https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12544
Holton, A., Weberling, B., Clarke, C. E., & Smith, M. J. (2012). The blame frame : Media attribution of culpability about the MMR-autism vaccination scare. Health Communication, 27(7), 690‑701.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2011.633158
Horbach, S. P. J. M., Breit, E., Halffman, W., & Mamelund, S.-E. (2020). On the Willingness to Report and the Consequences of Reporting Research Misconduct : The Role of Power Relations. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(3), 1595‑1623.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00202-8
Horbach, S. P. J. M., & Halffman, W. (2017). Promoting Virtue or Punishing Fraud : Mapping Contrasts in the Language of ‘Scientific Integrity’. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23(6), 1461‑1485.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-016-9858-y
Hosseini, M., & Lewis, J. (2020). The norms of authorship credit : Challenging the definition of authorship in The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. Accountability in Research, 27(2), 80‑98.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1721288
ICMJE. (2021). Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors.
Iphofen, R. (Éd.). (2020). Handbook of Research Ethics and Scientific Integrity. Springer International Publishing. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030167585
Jarvis, C. (2020). Journals, Peer Reviewers Cope with Surge in COVID-19 Publications. TheScientist.
John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2012). Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychological Science, 23(5), 524‑532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611430953
Kaatz, A., Vogelman, P. N., & Carnes, M. (2013). Are men more likely than women to commit scientific misconduct? Maybe, maybe not. MBio, 4(2), e00156-13.
https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00156-13
Kaldewey, D., & Schauz, D. (Éds.). (2018). Basic and Applied Research : The Language of Science Policy in the Twentieth Century (1st edition). Berghahn Books.
https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv8bt0z7
Kalichman, M. (2013). A brief history of RCR education. Accountability in Research, 20(5‑6), 380‑394.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2013.822260
Kalichman, M. (2014). Rescuing responsible conduct of research (RCR) education. Accountability in Research, 21(1), 68‑83.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2013.822271
Keith-Spiegel, P., & Koocher, G. P. (2005). The IRB paradox : Could the protectors also encourage deceit? Ethics & Behavior, 15(4), 339‑349.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327019eb1504_5
Koepsell, D. (2017). Scientific Integrity and Research Ethics : An Approach from the Ethos of Science. Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51277-8
Kon, A. A., Schilling, D. A., Heitman, E., Steneck, N. H., & Dubois, J. M. (2011). Content Analysis of Major Textbooks and Online Resources Used in Responsible Conduct of Research Instruction. AJOB Primary Research, 2(1), 42‑46. https://doi.org/10.1080/21507716.2011.564263
Kosmala, M., Wiggins, A., Swanson, A., & Simmons, B. (2016). Assessing data quality in citizen science. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 14(10), 551‑560.
https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1436
Kretser, A., Murphy, D., Bertuzzi, S., Abraham, T., Allison, D. B., Boor, K. J., Dwyer, J., Grantham, A., Harris, L. J., Hollander, R., Jacobs-Young, C., Rovito, S., Vafiadis, D., Woteki, C., Wyndham, J., & Yada, R. (2019). Scientific Integrity Principles and Best Practices : Recommendations from a Scientific Integrity Consortium. Science and Engineering Ethics, 25(2), 327‑355.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-019-00094-3
Kwasnicka, D., Hoor, G. A. ten, Dongen, A. van, Gruszczyńska, E., Hagger, M. S., Hamilton, K., Hankonen, N., Heino, M. T. J., Kotzur, M., Noone, C., Rothman, A. J., Toomey, E., Warner, L. M., Kok, G., Peters, G.-J., & Luszczynska, A. (2020). Promoting scientific integrity through open science in health psychology : Results of the Synergy Expert Meeting of the European health psychology society. Health Psychology Review, 0(0), 1‑17.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2020.1844037
Lacetera, N., & Zirulia, L. (2011). The Economics of Scientific Misconduct. The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 27(3), 568‑603.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ewp031
Lafollette, M. C. (2000). The Evolution of the “Scientific Misconduct” Issue : An Historical Overview. Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine, 224(4), 211‑215.
https://doi.org/10.1177/153537020022400405
Laine, H. (2018). Open science and codes of conduct on research integrity.
https://doi.org/10.23978/inf.77414
Lexchin, J., Bero, L. A., Djulbegovic, B., & Clark, O. (2003). Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality : Systematic review. BMJ : British Medical Journal, 326(7400), 1167.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.326.7400.1167
Lock, S. (1994). Research misconduct : A brief history and a comparison. Journal of Internal Medicine, 235(2), 123‑127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2796.1994.tb01045.x
Lundh, A., Sismondo, S., Lexchin, J., Busuioc, O. A., & Bero, L. (2012). Industry sponsorship and research outcome. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 12, MR000033. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000033.pub2
Martinson, B. C., Anderson, M. S., & de Vries, R. (2005). Scientists behaving badly. Nature, 435(7043), 737‑738. https://doi.org/10.1038/435737a
Marušić, A., Bošnjak, L., & Jerončić, A. (2011). A Systematic Review of Research on the Meaning, Ethics and Practices of Authorship across Scholarly Disciplines. PLOS ONE, 6(9), e23477.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023477
Masic, I. (2018). The Malversations of Authorship—Current Status in Academic Community and How to Prevent It. Acta Informatica Medica: AIM: Journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina: Casopis Drustva Za Medicinsku Informatiku BiH, 26(1), 4‑9.
https://doi.org/10.5455/aim.2018.26.4-9
McNutt, M. K., Bradford, M., Drazen, J. M., Hanson, B., Howard, B., Jamieson, K. H., Kiermer, V., Marcus, E., Pope, B. K., Schekman, R., Swaminathan, S., Stang, P. J., & Verma, I. M. (2018). Transparency in authors’ contributions and responsibilities to promote integrity in scientific publication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(11), 2557‑2560.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1715374115
Meriste, H., Parder, M.-L., Louk, K., Simm, K., Lilles-Heinsar, L., Veski, L., Soone, M., Juurik, M., & Sutrop, M. (2016). Normative analysis of research integrity and misconduct (Delivrable D II.3). PRINTEGER.
https://printeger.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/D2.3.pdf
Misra, D. P., Ravindran, V., & Agarwal, V. (2018). Integrity of Authorship and Peer Review Practices : Challenges and Opportunities for Improvement. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 33(46), e287.
https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e287
Moher, D., Bouter, L., Kleinert, S., Glasziou, P., Sham, M. H., Barbour, V., Coriat, A.-M., Foeger, N., & Dirnagl, U. (2020). The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers : Fostering research integrity. PLOS Biology, 18(7), e3000737. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000737
Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., Brown, R. P., Murphy, S. T., Hill, J. H., Antes, A. L., Waples, E. P., & Devenport, L. D. (2008). A Sensemaking Approach to Ethics Training for Scientists : Preliminary Evidence of Training Effectiveness. Ethics & behavior, 18(4), 315‑339.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10508420802487815
National Academy of Sciences. (1992). Responsible Science : Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process : Volume I. National Academies Press (US).
Necker, S. (2014). Scientific misbehavior in economics. Research Policy, 43(10), 1747‑1759.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.05.002
O’Boyle, E. H., Banks, G. C., & Gonzalez-Mulé, E. (2017). The Chrysalis Effect: How Ugly Initial Results Metamorphosize Into Beautiful Articles. Journal of Management, 43(2), 376‑399.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314527133
Palayew, A., Norgaard, O., Safreed-Harmon, K., Andersen, T. H., Rasmussen, L. N., & Lazarus, J. V. (2020). Pandemic publishing poses a new COVID-19 challenge. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(7), 666‑669.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0911-0
Pascal, C. B. (1999). The history and future of the office of research integrity : Scientific misconduct and beyond. Science and Engineering Ethics, 5(2), 183‑198.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-999-0008-7
Price, A. R. (2013). Research misconduct and its federal regulation : The origin and history of the Office of Research Integrity - with personal views by ORI’s former associate director for investigative oversight. Accountability in Research, 20(5‑6), 291‑319.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2013.822238
Pryor, E. R., Habermann, B., & Broome, M. E. (2007). Scientific misconduct from the perspective of research coordinators : A national survey. Journal of Medical Ethics, 33(6), 365‑369.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2006.016394
Pupovac, V., & Fanelli, D. (2015). Scientists Admitting to Plagiarism : A Meta-analysis of Surveys. Science and Engineering Ethics, 21(5), 1331‑1352.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-014-9600-6
Qaiser, D. (2021). COVID-19 Pandemic and Research Publications; Necessity of Maintaining Scientific Integrity. International Annals of Science, 10(1), 1‑6.
https://doi.org/10.21467/ias.10.1.1-6
Rasmussen, L. M. (2019). Confronting Research Misconduct in Citizen Science. Citizen Science: Theory and Practice, 4(1), 10.
https://doi.org/10.5334/cstp.207
Rennie, D., Yank, V., & Emanuel, L. (1997). When authorship fails. A proposal to make contributors accountable. JAMA, 278(7), 579‑585.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.278.7.579
Resnik, D. B. (2003). From Baltimore to Bell Labs : Reflections on two decades of debate about scientific misconduct. Accountability in Research, 10(2), 123‑135.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08989620300508
Resnik, D. B., & Elliott, K. C. (2013). Taking financial relationships into account when assessing research. Accountability in Research, 20(3), 184‑205.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2013.788383
Resnik, D. B., Elliott, K. C., & Miller, A. K. (2015). A framework for addressing ethical issues in citizen science. Environmental Science & Policy, 54, 475‑481.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.05.008
Roberts, L. L. (2020). Historicizing research integrity and fraud. History of Science, 58(4), 353‑353.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0073275320952617
Rowe, S., Alexander, N., Clydesdale, F., Applebaum, R., Atkinson, S., Black, R., Dwyer, J., Hentges, E., Higley, N., Lefevre, M., Lupton, J., Miller, S., Tancredi, D., Weaver, C., Woteki, C., & Wedral, E. (2009). Funding food science and nutrition research : Financial conflicts and scientific integrity. Nutrition Reviews, 67(5), 264‑272.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-4887.2009.00188.x
Sauermann, H., & Haeussler, C. (2017). Authorship and contribution disclosures. Science Advances, 3(11), e1700404. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1700404
Sismondo, S. (2007). Ghost Management: How Much of the Medical Literature Is Shaped Behind the Scenes by the Pharmaceutical Industry? PLOS Medicine, 4(9), e286.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040286
Sismondo, S. (2009). Ghosts in the Machine: Publication Planning in the Medical Sciences. Social Studies of Science, 39(2), 171‑198.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312708101047
Soltani, P., & Patini, R. (2020). Retracted COVID-19 articles : A side-effect of the hot race to publication. Scientometrics, 125(1), 819‑822.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03661-9
Speers, T., & Lewis, J. (2004). Journalists and jabs : Media coverage of the MMR vaccine. Communication & Medicine, 1(2), 171‑181.
https://doi.org/10.1515/come.2004.1.2.171
Steen, R. G. (2011a). Retractions in the scientific literature : Do authors deliberately commit research fraud? Journal of Medical Ethics, 37(2), 113‑117.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2010.038125
Steen, R. G. (2011b). Retractions in the scientific literature : Is the incidence of research fraud increasing? Journal of Medical Ethics, 37(4), 249‑253.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2010.040923
Steneck, N. H. (1994). Research universities and scientific misconduct—History, policies, and the future. The Journal of Higher Education, 65(3), 310‑330.
Steneck, N. H. (2006). Fostering integrity in research : Definitions, current knowledge, and future directions. Science and Engineering Ethics, 12(1), 53‑74.
https://doi.org/10.1007/PL0002226
Steneck, N. H. (2013). Global Research Integrity Training. Science, 340(6132), 552‑553.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1236373
Steneck, N. H., & Bulger, R. E. (2007). The history, purpose, and future of instruction in the responsible conduct of research. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 82(9), 829‑834.
https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f7d4d
Street, J. M., Rogers, W. A., Israel, M., & Braunack-Mayer, A. J. (2010). Credit where credit is due? Regulation, research integrity and the attribution of authorship in the health sciences. Social Science & Medicine (1982), 70(9), 1458‑1465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.01.013
Swazey, J. P., Anderson, M. S., Lewis, K. S., & Louis, K. S. (1993). Ethical Problems in Academic Research. American Scientist, 81(6), 542‑553.
Tereskerz, P. M., Hamric, A. B., Guterbock, T. M., & Moreno, J. D. (2009). Prevalence of industry support and its relationship to research integrity. Accountability in Research, 16(2), 78‑105.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08989620902854945
Titus, S. L., Wells, J. A., & Rhoades, L. J. (2008). Repairing research integrity. Nature, 453(7198), 980‑982.
https://doi.org/10.1038/453980a
Truchet, D. (2021). Intégrité scientifique et déontologie : Une étude comparée. In O. Descamps & K. Lairedj (Éds.), L’intégrité scientifique à l’aune du droit. Éditions Panthéon-Assas. https://www.lgdj.fr/l-integrite-scientifique-a-l-aune-du-droit-9782376510352.html
Van Dalen, H. P., & Henkens, K. (2012). Intended and unintended consequences of a publish-or-perish culture : A worldwide survey. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(7), 1282‑1293.
https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.22636
Watts, L. L., Medeiros, K. E., Mulhearn, T. J., Steele, L. M., Connelly, S., & Mumford, M. D. (2017). Are Ethics Training Programs Improving? A Meta-Analytic Review of Past and Present Ethics Instruction in the Sciences. Ethics & Behavior, 27(5), 351‑384.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2016.1182025
WCRI. (2010). The Singapore Statement on Research Integrity.
https://wcrif.org/documents/327-singapore-statement-a4size/file
WCRI. (2013). Montreal Statement on Research Integrity in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations.
https://wcrif.org/documents/354-montreal-statement-english/file
Wray, K. B., & Andersen, L. E. (2018). Retractions in Science. Scientometrics, 117(3), 2009‑2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2922-4
Wright, D. E., Titus, S. L., & Cornelison, J. B. (2008). Mentoring and research misconduct : An analysis of research mentoring in closed ORI cases. Science and Engineering Ethics, 14(3), 323‑336.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-008-9074-5
Yeo-Teh, N. S. L., & Tang, B. L. (2021). An alarming retraction rate for scientific publications on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Accountability in Research, 28(1), 47‑53. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2020.1782203
Téléchargements
Publiée
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
(c) Tous droits réservés Amine Mansour, Stéphanie Ruphy 2022
Ce travail est disponible sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International.
Les auteurs conservent le droit d'auteur et accordent à la revue le droit de première publication, l'ouvrage étant alors disponible simultanément, sous la licence Licence d’attribution Creative Commons permettant à d'autres de partager l'ouvrage tout en en reconnaissant la paternité et la publication initiale dans cette revue.
