[et_pb_section bb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section”][et_pb_row admin_label=”row”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″][et_pb_text admin_label=”Text” background_layout=”light” text_orientation=”left” use_border_color=”off” border_color=”#ffffff” border_style=”solid”] How are research ethics promoted on the european level? The President of the “European Network of Research Ethics Committees” (EUREC), Prof. Dr. med.
Science is the search for truth and knowledge. Originality and autonomy are its lifeblood. Science only becomes science by a bona fide treatment of data, facts, and intellectual property. 1) The basic rules of scientific work have to remain unchanged Relevance and reputation of science are critically determined by the adherence to immanent ethical principles.
Description The term “Smart Library” has recently been used more frequently, for labeling a vision of libraries of the future (examples see Fig. 1 and 2), in particular as part of the so called “Smart City” concept. This concept addresses the integration of digital processes and informational feedback loops in the public infrastructure and claims this integration to be a desirable state, in which cities become “smarter”, i.e.
Social media is increasingly seen as a valuable source of data for research – one which is highly current and immediately accessible. However recent news has focused on the ethics of using information posted for one reason for another purpose entirely. If you were to ask ten researchers if it is ok for them to use social media posts in their research you might well receive ten different answers.
Director of the Norwegian National Commission for the Investigation of Research Misconduct Annette Birkeland explains, why it is important to promote good research practices by developing guidelines and norms for good research and by advising scientists on ethical dilemmas.
Double blind peer reviewing, compared to open reviewing, is a great system to ensure quality in research that focuses on the content rather than the person(s) behind the research. However, the current review system for many academic publications is flawed. It hinders publication of timely and excellent research for three main reasons. The examples provided for mediocre reviewer suggestions are from my own experience.
His dissertation is excellent. He is widely recognized as a talented lecturer. Then the news comes: he is a fraud. And almost no one had noticed anything. In the summer semester of 2014, Dr. Christian M. held the introductory lecture course, History of Political Thought, every Monday from 2 to 4pm. Plato, Kant, Marx, the great thinkers;
The role of libraries in the 21st century is changing. One indication is the emergence of new services and job profiles: libraries offer services to support researchers throughout the creation, publication, dissemination and discovery of their research.
Research cannot just observe the society from an isolated and abstract “outside world”. It has to take up its societal tasks: search for the truth, but also provide contributions to problem-solving and make reliable predictions, when it comes to ominous societal challenges. Former president of the Humboldt University Berlin Prof.
Retraction Watch was launched to provide insights into cases of scientific fraud and grant a window on the retraction process. How does the scientific community react when you publicly report on retractions of scientific papers?
