From the blog of Dariusz Leszczynski, Between a Rock and a Hard Place:
Did INTERPHONE commit scientific misconduct?
July 7, 2011
The definitions of the scientific misconduct used by various institutions or provided in various dictionaries differ slightly. Here are few of them.
British Medical Journal (BMJ) uses the definition of the scientific misconduct provided by the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) that is a slightly amended version of the US Office of Research Integrity definition of scientific misconduct (http://resources.bmj.com/bmj/authors/editorial-policies/scientific-misconduct):
“…Falsification of data: ranges from fabrication to deceptive selective reporting of findings and omission of conflicting data, or willful suppression and/or distortion of data…”.
The US Office of Research Integrity (ORI) (http://ori.hhs.gov/misconduct/definition_misconduct.shtml):
“… (b) Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record…”.
“Forms of scientific misconduct include: … Obfuscation – the omission of critical data or results. Example: Only reporting positive outcomes and not adverse outcomes…”.
SNIP.Leave a reply →