2015PubMedRequires access

[Handling of misconduct in Swedish research must be improved. More strict investigative procedures, tougher punishments and withdrawals are required].

Stig Linder

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Scientific misconduct constitutes a severe threat to research. Procedures to handle misconduct must therefore be both efficient and precise. In Sweden, suspected cases of misconduct are handled by the universities themselves. Investigations are generally performed by appointed scientists, leading to unnecessary discussions of the validity of the conclusions made. Sweden has a Central Ethical Review Board but this is infrequently used by the universities. It is an absolute requirement for a university to withdraw incorrect publications from the literature but regulations in this area are lacking in Sweden. The extraordinarily strong legal status of graduate students at Swedish universities leads to slow and costly investigations. Even when found to be guilty of misconduct, students are allowed to defend their PhD theses. In conclusion, there is a large potential for improvement of the regulations and routines for handling scientific misconduct in Sweden.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Scientific misconduct constitutes a severe threat to research. Procedures to handle misconduct must therefore be both efficient and precise. In Sweden, suspected cases of misconduct are handled by the universities themselves. Investigations are generally performed by appointed scientists, leading to unnecessary discussions of the validity of the conclusions made. Sweden has a Central Ethical Review Board but this is infrequently used by the universities. It is an absolute requirement for a university to withdraw incorrect publications from the literature but regulations in this area are lacking in Sweden. The extraordinarily strong legal status of graduate students at Swedish universities leads to slow and costly investigations. Even when found to be guilty of misconduct, students are allowed to defend their PhD theses. In conclusion, there is a large potential for improvement of the regulations and routines for handling scientific misconduct in Sweden.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Scientific misconduct constitutes a severe threat to research. Procedures to handle misconduct must therefore be both efficient and precise. In Sweden, suspected cases of misconduct are handled by the universities themselves. Investigations are generally performed by appointed scientists, leading to unnecessary discussions of the validity of the conclusions made. Sweden has a Central Ethical Review Board but this is infrequently used by the universities. It is an absolute requirement for a university to withdraw incorrect publications from the literature but regulations in this area are lacking in Sweden. The extraordinarily strong legal status of graduate students at Swedish universities leads to slow and costly investigations. Even when found to be guilty of misconduct, students are allowed to defend their PhD theses. In conclusion, there is a large potential for improvement of the regulations and routines for handling scientific misconduct in Sweden.

Key concepts: Misconduct, Scientific misconduct, Political science, Law, Psychology, Engineering ethics, Criminology, Engineering

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
[Handling of misconduct in Swedish research must be improved. More strict investigative procedures, tougher punishments and withdrawals are required]. — Research Paper | ScholarLens