Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Using criminalization and due process to reduce scientific misconduct.

Benjamin K Sovacool1

  • 1Center for Science & Technology, Society Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, USA.

The American Journal of Bioethics : AJOB
|September 24, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Biodiversity loss will decrease the future creditworthiness of nations.

Nature ecology & evolution·2026
Same author

Plentitude of Pathways: Expert Views on the Benefits and Risks of Carbon Dioxide Removal in Six Countries.

Environmental science & technology·2026
Same author

Exploring patterns of distributional justice in global climate change mitigation scenarios.

npj climate action·2026
Same author

Why transparency matters for sustainable data centers and carbon-neutral artificial intelligence (AI).

iScience·2025
Same author

Reviewing the 95 sociotechnical barriers to the decarbonization of buildings.

Nature communications·2025
Same author

Exploring global climate intervention experiments: sociotechnical promises, innovation dynamics, and perceived co-impacts across 20 projects and pilots.

Sustainability science·2025

Stricter criminal sanctions and whistleblower protections are crucial for minimizing scientific misconduct, such as fraud and plagiarism. Implementing due process standards ensures fair investigations into research integrity.

Area of Science:

  • Bioethics
  • Scientific Integrity
  • Research Policy

Background:

  • Scientific misconduct, including fraud, fabrication, and plagiarism, erodes public trust and harms public health.
  • Addressing scientific misconduct is a complex and controversial issue involving multiple stakeholders.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To advocate for enhanced measures to minimize scientific misconduct.
  • To highlight the need for stricter sanctions, improved whistleblower protections, and due process in investigations.

Main Methods:

  • Literature review on scientific misconduct.
  • Analysis of existing policies and ethical considerations.
  • Proposal of new regulatory and procedural standards.

Main Results:

Keywords:
Biomedical and Behavioral ResearchLegal Approach

Related Experiment Videos

  • Current approaches to scientific misconduct are insufficient.
  • Harsher criminal sanctions can deter misconduct and motivate whistleblowers.
  • Due process standards are essential for fair investigations.

Conclusions:

  • Urgent implementation of stricter criminal statutes against scientific misconduct is necessary.
  • Enhanced protections for whistleblowers are vital for reporting misconduct.
  • Establishing due process standards will ensure fairness and balance in misconduct investigations.