Bibliography

Amdur, R., & Bankert, E. (2001). Institutional Review Board: Management and Function. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Barlett Publishers.

American Statistical Association. (1999). Ethical guidelines for statistical practice. Retrieved August 7, 2005 from http://www.amstat.org/profession/index.cfm?fuseaction=ethicalstatistics

Baldwin, W., & Seto, B. (1997). Peer review: Selecting the best science. Science and Engineering Ethics, 3, 11-17.

Barinaga, M. (2002, July 21). Conflicts of interest: Confusion on the cutting edge. Science, 257, 616-619.

Barnbaum, D.R., & Byron, M. (2001). Research ethics: Text and readings. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Birney, E. 2012. The making of ENCODE: lessons for big-data projects. Nature 489 (6 September 2012), 49-51. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v489/n7414/full/489049a.html; also via nature.com/encode

Bird, S.J. (1995). Assessing conflict of interest: Sources of bias. Science and Engineering Ethics, 1, 386-388.

Bird, S.J. (2001). Mentors, advisors and supervisors: Their role in teaching responsible conduct of research. Science and Engineering Ethics, 7, 455-468.

Bird, S.J., & Spier, R. (Eds). (1997). Science and Engineering Ethics, 3(1).

Bird, S.J., & Sprague, R.L. (2001). Mentoring and the responsible conduct of research: Reflections and future. Science and Engineering Ethics, 7, 451-454.

Bozeman, B., & Youtie, J. (2017). The strength in numbers: The new science of team science. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Braxton, J.M. (Ed.). (1999). Perspectives on scholarly misconduct in the sciences. Chicago, IL: Ohio State University Press.

Broad, W., & Wade, N. (1982). Betrayers of the truth. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Bulger, R.E., Heitman, E., & Reiser, S.J. (2002). The ethical dimensions of the biological and health sciences (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Cicchetti, D.V. (1997). Referees, editors, and publication practices: Improving the reliability and usefulness of the peer review system. Science and Engineering Ethics, 3, 51-62.

Committee on Assessing Integrity in Research Environments. (2002). Integrity in scientific research: Creating an environment that promotes responsible conduct. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. (1992). Advisor, teacher, role model, friend: On being a mentor to students in science and engineering. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. (1992). Responsible science, volume I: Ensuring the integrity of the research process. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. (1993). Responsible science, volume II: Ensuring the integrity of the research process. Washington, DC: National Academy Press

Corti, L., Van den Dynden, V., Bishp, L., & Woollard, M. (2014). Managing and Sharing Research Data: A Guide to Good Practice. London: Sage Publications.

Davidson, E.W., Cate, H.E., Lewis, C.M., & Hunter, M. (2001). Data manipulation in the undergraduate laboratory: What are we teaching? Proceedings of the Office of Research Integrity, USA, 27-32.

Evans, I. (2002). Conflict of interest: The importance of potential. Science and Engineering Ethics, 8, 393-396.

Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and falsify research?  A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data.  PLoS ONE 4(5): e5738. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005738

Fine, M.A., & Kurdek, L.A. (1993). Reflections on determining authorship credit and authorship order on faculty-student collaborations. American Psychologist, 48, 1141-1147.

Fletcher, R.H., & Fletcher, S.W. (1997). Evidence for the effectiveness of peer review. Science and Engineering Ethics, 3, 34-50.

Friedman, P.J. (1992). The troublesome semantics of conflict of interest. Ethics & Behavior, 2, 245-251.

Friedman, P.J. (2002). The impact of conflict of interest on trust in science. Science and Engineering Ethics, 8, 413-420.

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Sponsorship, authorship, and accountability. Retrieved July 10, 2003 from http://www.icmje.org/sponsor.htm

Kostoff, R.N. (1997). The principles and practices of peer review. Science and Engineering Ethics 3, 19-34.

Lock, S., & Wells, F. (Eds.). (1993). Fraud and misconduct in medical research. London: BMJ Publishing Group.

Lovejoy, T. I., Reveson, T. A., & France, C. R. (2011). Reviewing manuscripts for peer-review journals: A Primer for Novice and Seasoned Reviewers. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 42, 1-13.

Macrina, F.L. (2000). Scientific integrity: An introductory text with cases (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology Press.

Maestre, F.T. (2019). Ten simple rules towards healthier research labs. PLoS Computational Biology 15(4): e1006914. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006914

Maienschein, J. 1993. Why collaborate? Journal of the History of Biology, 26(2):167-183.

Malilay, G., & Mueting, A. (1995). Record or repent: The importance of research documentation. Unpublished manuscript.

Merz, J.F. (Ed.). (2003, March 10). A note from the editor. Penn Bioethics 10(4). Retrieved August 7, 2007 from http://www.bioethics.upenn.edu/download.php?id=PennBioethicsNL_v10n4.pdf

National Academy of Sciences. (1995). On being a scientist: Responsible conduct in research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Institutes of Health. Guidelines for the conduct of research in the intramural research programs at NIH. Retrieved July 10, 2003 from http://www.nih.gov/campus/irnews/guidelines.htm

National Research Council. (1985). Sharing research data. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (1996). Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Office of Science and Technology (OSTP) Federal policy on research misconduct, final policy, 65 Fed. Reg. 76260, 76262 (Dec. 6, 2000).

Orlans, B.F. (1993). In the name of science: Issues in responsible animal experimentation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Penslar, R.L. (Ed.). (1995). Research ethics: Cases & materials. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Pritchard, M.S. (2002). Conflict of interest: The very idea. Research Integrity, 5(2).

Regan, T. (1983). The case for animal rights. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Reyes, J.A. (Ed.). Data control and management and authorship guidelines at Michigan State University: The need for best practices. Research Integrity, 5(1). Retrieved August 7, 2007 from http://grad.msu.edu/all/rif01.pdf

Reyes, J.A. (Ed.). Conflict of interest. Research Integrity, 5(2).

Shamoo, A.E., & Resnik, D.B. (2003). Responsible conduct of research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Sigma Xi. (1993). Ethics, values, and the promise of science. Forum proceedings, February 25-26. Research Triangle Park, NC: Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society.

Sigma Xi. (1999). The responsible researcher: Paths and pitfalls. Research Triangle Park, NC: Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society.

Sigma Xi. (2000). Honor in science. Research Triangle Park, NC: Sigma Xi, The Scientific Research Society.

Singer, P. (1975). Animal liberation. New York, NY: New York Review (distributed by Random House).

Sprague, R. L., Daw, J., & Roberts, G.C. (2001). Influences on the ethical beliefs of graduate students concerning research. Science and Engineering Ethics, 7, 507-520.

University of New Hampshire. (2001). A handbook for graduate faculty advisors and mentors. Retrieved August 7, 2007 from http://www.gradschool.unh.edu/pdf/FacAdvHndbk.pdf

University of Pittsburgh. (1997). Guidelines for ethical practices in research. Retrieved July 10, 2003 from http://www.pitt.edu/~provost/ethresearch.html

Whistleblowers' Protection Act, 13, New Hampshire Rev. Stat. Ann. § 275-E.

Whitbeck, C. (2001). Group mentoring to foster the responsible conduct of research. Science and Engineering Ethics, 7, 541-558.

Whyte, A., Tedds, J. (2011). ‘Making the Case for Research Data Management’. DCC Briefing Papers. Edinburgh: Digital Curation Centre. Available online: http://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/briefing-papers

Ziman, J. (2002). The continuing need for disinterested research. Science & Engineering Ethics, 8, 397-399.