Changing explanatory frameworks in the U.S. government’s attempt to define research misconduct
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] John Ziman,et al. Research as a Career , 1990 .
[2] Diane Hoffman-Kim,et al. On being a scientist , 1995 .
[3] A. Relman,et al. Fraud in biomedical research. , 1988, The New England journal of medicine.
[4] M. Mulkay,et al. Opening Pandora's Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientists' Discourse , 1984 .
[5] D E Buzzelli,et al. The definition of misconduct in science: a view from NSF , 1993, Science.
[6] A. R. Price. Definitions and boundaries of research misconduct: perspectives from a federal government viewpoint. , 1994, The Journal of higher education.
[7] I. Mitroff. Emotion and Bias in Science. (Book Reviews: The Subjective Side of Science. A Philosophical Inquiry into the Psychology of the Apollo Moon Scientists) , 1974 .
[8] H. Zuckerman. Norms and Deviant Behavior in Science , 1984 .
[9] Deena Weinstein,et al. Fraud in science. , 1979, Social science quarterly.
[10] S. Bird,et al. New common federal definition of research misconduct in the United States , 2000, Science and engineering ethics.
[11] Charles Babbage,et al. Reflections on the Decline of Science in England, and on Some of Its Causes , 1970 .
[12] W. Schmaus. Fraud and the Norms of Science , 1983, Science, technology & human values.
[13] Norman Kaplan,et al. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations , 1974 .