» Articles » PMID: 33234058

Cycles of Invisibility: The Limits of Transparency in Dealing with Scientific Misconduct

Overview
Journal Soc Stud Sci
Publisher Sage Publications
Specialty Science
Date 2020 Nov 25
PMID 33234058
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Sanctions for plagiarism, falsification and fabrication in research are primarily symbolic. This paper investigates sanctions for scientific misconduct and their preceding investigation processes as visible and legitimate symbols. Using three different data sources (retraction notices, expert interviews, and a survey of scientists), we show that sanctions for scientific misconduct operate within a cycle of visibility, in which sanctions are highly visible, while investigation and decision-making procedures remain mostly invisible. This corresponds to high levels of acceptance of sanctions in the scientific community, but a low acceptance of the respective authorities. Such a punitiveness in turn exacerbates confidentiality concerns, so that authorities become even more secretive. We argue that punitiveness towards scientific misconduct is driven by such a cycle of invisibility.

Citing Articles

Scientific misconduct responsibility attribution: An empirical study on byline position and team identity in Chinese medical papers.

Peng X, Hu D, Guo Y, Jiang H, Wu X, Hu Q PLoS One. 2024; 19(8):e0308377.

PMID: 39102401 PMC: 11299828. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0308377.


Potential Issues in Mandating a Disclosure of Institutional Investigation in Retraction Notices.

Tang B Sci Eng Ethics. 2024; 30(1):1.

PMID: 38261088 PMC: 10805848. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-024-00468-2.


What do Retraction Notices Reveal About Institutional Investigations into Allegations Underlying Retractions?.

Xu S, Evans N, Hu G, Bouter L Sci Eng Ethics. 2023; 29(4):25.

PMID: 37402081 PMC: 10319669. DOI: 10.1007/s11948-023-00442-4.