deterring misconducts in academia

Halmar Halide @ physics unhas

DETERRING MISCONDUCT IN ACADEMIA*

Halmar Halide Physics Dept FMIPA Unhas

Validation, Reviewer and PAK [email protected]

* Workshop on Research Instrument and International Publication organized by Physics Study Program Held at Science Building FMIPA, Makassar, April 2nd 2014


•Background: more retractions and irreproducible papers, cost of misconducts

• Misconducts (MCs): Plagiarism, Self-plagiarism, salami/tempe pub., bogus Authorship, COI

•Avoidance & Detectors: software

•Unhas efforts against MCs: Self-Assessment & Declarations


Article withdrawal Policies and Formshttps://www.elsevier.com/about/publishing-guidelines/policies/article-withdrawal

Article Withdrawal: Only used for Articles in Press which represent early versions of articles and sometimes contain errors, or may have been accidentally submitted twice. Occasionally, but less frequently, the articles may represent infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like.

Article Retraction: Infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like. Occasionally a retraction will be used to correct errors in submission or publication.

Article Removal: Legal limitations upon the publisher, copyright holder or author(s).

Article Replacement: Identification of false or inaccurate data that, if acted upon, would pose a serious health risk.

…………the importance of the scholarly archive as a permanent, historic record of the transactions of scholarship. Articles that have been published shall remain extant, exact and unaltered as far as is possible. However, very occasionally circumstances may arise where an article is published that must later be retracted or even removed.

https://www.elsevier.com/about/publishing-guidelines/policies/article-withdrawal






Misconduct-related retractions Increase….


Misconduct-related retractions Increase…(continued)


Irreproducible findings

Unfortunately, Amgen's findings are consistent with those of others in industry. A team at Bayer HealthCare in Germany last year reported4 that only about 25% of published preclinical studies could be validated to the point at which projects could continue.

Fifty-three papers were deemed 'landmark' studiesNevertheless, scientific findings were confirmed in only 6 (11%) cases.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/full/483531a.html


http://www.ithenticate.com/resources/infographics/research-misconduct?...Cost of misconducts


original my modification


http://www.utm.utoronto.ca/academic-integrity/students

+ 1 q: his/her NOVELTY and ORIGINALITY

5 q’s

“5 + 1” CREED


Examples:

Trends:

http://www.utm.utoronto.ca/academic-integrity/students

•Forging, altering, or falsifying documents•Using, obtaining or possessing unauthorized aids or assistance•Impersonating another person or having somone impersonate you•Plagiarism – representing as one’s own any idea or expression of an idea or work of another without proper citation•Submitting, without instructor’s knowledge or consent, work that has been previously submitted in another course/program•Submitting work containing concocted/false references•Continuing to write after a test/examination is over

•Plagiarizing•Collaboration/unauthorized assistance•Purchasing work•Recycling work - "double-dipping"•Resubmitting of altered work for re-grading•Electronic devices (cell phones) or any unauthorized aids•Altering medical certificates and UofT documents



https://ori.hhs.gov/definition-misconduct



http://publicationethics.org/cases




http://blog.scielo.org/en/2013/11/11/ethical-editing-practices-and-the-problem-of-self-plagiarism/#.UzS8yM7rvtk



Bretag and Mahmud, 2009






http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html


http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html


http://mulford.meduohio.edu/instr/


http://archsurg.jamanetwork.com/public/instructionsForAuthors.aspx#SecDuplicatePreviousPublicationorSubmission

http://www.elsevier.com/journals/pharmacological-research/1043-6618/ guide-for-authors#5000

http://www.elsevier.com/journals/pharmacological-research/1043-6618/


Updated October 2013






http://publicationethics.org/cases

fdc11166046-photo https://www.inmagine.com/searchterms/salami.html

http://www.123rf.com/stock-photo/tempe.html


http://www.biochemia-medica.com/2013/23/237



COI


http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/12/is-the-scientific-literature-self-correcting.html

Glenn Begley, former head of research at Amgen in Thousand Oaks, California, made headlines back in March when he revealed that scientists at his company had been unable to validate the conclusions of 47 out of 53 ‘landmark’ papers — papers exciting enough to inspire the possibilities of drug-discovery programmes. In one study, which has been cited over 1,900 times, not even the original researchers could reproduce the results in their own laboratory.

He listed six warning signs that a paper’s conclusions are unreliable: specimens were assessed without blinding, not all results were shown, experiments were not repeated, inappropriate statistical tests were used, reagents weren’t validated (polyclonal antibodies have limited uses) and positive and negative controls were not shown.

Flawed papers appear regularly in high-impact journals: “Once you start looking, it’s in every issue,” Begley said. Top-tier journals are publishing sloppy science, he continued.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v483/n7391/full/483531a.html


http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/12/cleaning-up-science.html


Test case: similar article

Menggagas Asuransi Bencana

Gagasan Asuransi Bencana

versus


Whole article


One paragraph


another paragraph


Software detector


UNHAS’s efforts

Self-assessment and Declarations








save yourself

to save UNHAS

thank you...

Documents

deterring misconducts in academia