|
| 论文撤稿调查中的美国科研失信行为调查规则的演进研究 |
| Research on the evolution of the U.S. PHS Policy on Research Misconduct to explore retraction policies of journals |
| 投稿时间：2025-12-01 修订日期：2026-02-02 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 论文撤稿 科研失信 程序正义 ORI。 |
| 英文关键词: paper retraction research misconduct procedural justice ORI |
| 基金项目: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 184 |
| 全文下载次数: 0 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目前论文撤稿数量呈上升趋势，但多数科技期刊缺乏公开、明确、统一的问题论文调查处理规则，导致程序公正性受到质疑。本研究对美国科研诚信办公室制定的科研失信行为规则的三个版本进行对比分析，发现规则的演进过程清晰地体现了对Leventhal's Rules中公平性六项原则的持续强化。同时，我国现阶段的《科研失信行为调查处理规则》亦具备这六项程序正义原则。研究认为，期刊应主动制定兼顾程序正义的问题论文调查处理规则，以确保处理过程的公正性，进而有效维护科研诚信环境 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Currently, there is a rising trend in the number of retracted papers. However, most scientific journals lack transparent, explicit, and standardized procedures for investigating and handling problematic papers, which raises concerns about procedural justice. This study compares three versions of research misconduct rules developed by the U.S. Office of Research Integrity and finds that the evolution of these rules clearly reflects a continuous strengthening of the six principles of fairness outlined in Leventhal"s Rules. Concurrently, these six principles of procedural justice are also present in China"s current “Regulations on the Investigation and Handling of Research Misconduct.” We suggests that journals should establish for problematic papers investigation and handling regulations that incorporate procedural justice, ensuring fairness in the process and thereby effectively safeguarding the research integrity environment. |
|
View Fulltext
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
