Research integrity (RI) is fundamental in all areas of scientific endeavor. As scientists, we rely and build on the scientific record and if this is being deliberately distorted, then it not only results in the waste of resources, especially time, and may divert research into dead ends but it also erodes public confidence in science. Policies are now in place both to address misconduct and, through educational programs, to promote the responsible conduct of research. The frequency of misconduct is discussed and four famous cases in geosciences spanning the twentieth century are described. Recent developments in the formulation of RI policy are outlined culminating in the Singapore Statement, one of the key foundational documents in the evolution of RI policy. The four principles and 14 responsibilities of researchers and their institutions are given. While there is a need for education and training and for institutions to create the best conditions to promote good research, ultimately, responsibility for the good conduct must lie with the individual. There can be no other way.
[1]
Nicholas H. Steneck,et al.
Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment
,
2011
.
[2]
S. B. Bhatia.
Early Devonian ostracodes
,
1989,
Nature.
[3]
John A. Talent,et al.
The peripatetic fossils: part 5
,
1990,
Nature.
[4]
J. Weiner,et al.
The Piltdown Forgery
,
1955
.
[5]
J. B. Waterhouse.
The peripatetic fossils: part 4
,
1990,
Nature.
[6]
Vishwa Jit Gupta.
The peripatetic fossils: part 2
,
1989,
Nature.
[7]
C. S. Yogananda,et al.
VEDIC MATHEMATICS. AUTHOR'S REPLIES
,
1996
.
[8]
John A. Talent,et al.
The case of the peripatetic fossils
,
1989,
Nature.
[9]
A. D. Ahluwalia.
The peripatetic fossils: part 3
,
1989,
Nature.
[10]
H. W. Turnbull,et al.
Correspondence of Isaac Newton
,
1961,
Nature.
[11]
Sandra L. Titus,et al.
Repairing research integrity
,
2008,
Nature.