...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Science and engineering ethics >Questionable, Objectionable or Criminal? Public Opinion on Data Fraud and Selective Reporting in Science
【24h】

Questionable, Objectionable or Criminal? Public Opinion on Data Fraud and Selective Reporting in Science

机译：可疑，令人反感或犯罪？ 关于数据欺诈和科学选择性报告的舆论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Data fraud and selective reporting both present serious threats to the credibility of science. However, there remains considerable disagreement among scientists about how best to sanction data fraud, and about the ethicality of selective reporting. The public is arguably the largest stakeholder in the reproducibility of science; research is primarily paid for with public funds, and flawed science threatens the public's welfare. Members of the public are able to make meaningful judgments about the morality of different behaviors using moral intuitions. Legal scholars emphasize that to maintain legitimacy, social control policies must be developed with some consideration given to the public's moral intuitions. Although there is a large literature on popular attitudes toward science, there is no existing evidence about public opinion on data fraud or selective reporting. We conducted two studies-a survey experiment with a nationwide convenience sample (N = 821), and a follow-up survey with a representative sample of US adults (N = 964)-to explore community members' judgments about the morality of data fraud and selective reporting in science. The findings show that community members make a moral distinction between data fraud and selective reporting, but overwhelmingly judge both behaviors to be immoral and deserving of punishment. Community members believe that scientists who commit data fraud or selective reporting should be fired and banned from receiving funding. For data fraud, most Americans support criminal penalties. Results from an ordered logistic regression analysis reveal few demographic and no significant partisan differences in punitiveness toward data fraud.
机译：数据欺诈和选择性报告对科学信誉造成严重威胁。然而，科学家们对如何最好地制定数据欺诈以及选择性报告的伦理性，仍然存在相当大的分歧。公众可以说是科学重现性的最大利益攸关方;研究主要用于公共资金支付，有缺陷的科学威胁着公共福利。公众成员能够使用道德直觉对不同行为的道德进行有意义的判断。法律学者强调，为了维持合法性，必须通过对公众道德直觉的一些考虑来制定社会控制政策。虽然对科学态度有很大的文学，但没有关于数据欺诈或选择性报告的舆论的现有证据。我们进行了两项研究 - 一项调查实验，具有全国方便样本（n = 821），以及与美国成年人的代表性样本进行后续调查 - 探索社区成员关于数据欺诈道德的判断和科学中的选择性报告。调查结果表明，社区成员在数据欺诈和选择性报告之间做出道德区分，但绝大多数判断两种行为都是不道德和应得的惩罚。社区成员认为，应解雇犯下数据欺诈或选择性报告的科学家免受接受资金。对于数据欺诈，大多数美国人都支持刑事处罚。有序物流回归分析的结果揭示了几乎没有人口统计学，没有显着的偏见对数据欺诈的惩罚性的差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号