【作者】 蒋美仕；

【导师】 李建华； 刘大椿；

【作者基本信息】 中南大学 ， 伦理学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 在发达国家已经完成由学院科学向后学院科学的转变,并且科技经济一体化趋势日益增强的知识经济时代,随着科技活动逐渐成为所有社会活动的中心,特别是功利目的已成为科学研究的最主要动因,科学家们对于科技资源的争夺日趋激烈,国际国内的重大科研不端行为事件频频发生、日益猖獗,并已成为全球性的热点、焦点、难点与重大课题。因此,运用交叉科学的理论与方法,既从理论上系统地研究关于科研不端行为的概念框架、复杂多样的因果关系、主要理论范式及其转换,又从范例上深入分析、客观评价和充分借鉴美国应对科研不端行为的指导方针、战略决策、制度设计、体制安排、机制与程序运作的成功经验,这对于构建中国科研不端行为综合防范体系、积极应对来自不端行为事件的严峻挑战并切实有效地解决其现存的主要问题,显然都具有极为重要的理论价值与现实意义。关于科研不端行为的概念界定、基本特征及其类型剖析,构成了反思科研不端行为的概念框架。由微观科学家个体、中观科学共同体等科研组织以及宏观社会环境这三个层面因素相互作用所导致的科研不端行为,既可能对科学社会建制内部的不端行为人自身、合作者、其他同行和专业共同体带来极大的利益与名誉损害,也可能给科学社会建制外部的研究资助机构、社会制度及其文化观念造成物质与精神的损失,甚至因科学纯洁性的损毁而可能导致社会公众的信任丧失。R.K.默顿关于由公有性、普遍性、无私利性、独创性和有条理的怀疑主义(CUDOS)等所构成的学院科学规范结构理论,J.齐曼关于由私有性、局部性、独裁主义、受委托性和专门性(PLACE)等所构成的后学院科学规范结构理论,以及美国国家学院组织专家所提出的科研诚信理论,构成了探究科研不端行为的主要理论范式与分析视角。这些理论范式之间的历史与逻辑相统一的关系表现为：既在历史传承基础上依次发生了相应的范式转换与创新,又在逻辑基础上各自独立、彼此共存与相辅相成。这种理论研究不仅为系统把握科研不端行为描绘了一幅整体性的认识论图景,而且为美国科研不端行为综合防范体系的构建提供了重要的指导思想与逻辑基础。根据科研不端行为演变的规律性,美国先后实行了由职业伦理到公共政策的单一惩治,以及由公共政策到包括伦理、法律、法规、规章、政策、技术、教育、培训和研究等手段在内的综合防范的两次策略转变。美国防范科研不端行为的制度体系由以下两部分有机构成：一是直接规范科研不端行为的政策法规体系；二是与此密切相关并包括实验人体保护、实验动物福利、数据管理、利益冲突、导师与研究生责任、合作研究、原创作者与出版、同行评议等方面的政策法规体系。此二者既相对独立又相辅相成,共同对科研不端行为起着惩处和防范作用。它们为美国防范科研不端行为层级监管机制的健康、有序和高效运作,既提供了正确的指导方针又提供了坚实的组织基础与强大的制度保障。美国联邦政府科研不端行为的层级监管机制是其整个防范体系的核心。从白宫科技政策办公室(OSTP)到联邦政府各部门和机构、卫生部应对科研不端行为的专门机构——研究诚信办公室(ORI)与各部门监察长办公室(OIG),直至接受联邦资助的大学、医院、研究机构等基层组织及其监管机构,它们既各享其权、各司其职、各负其责,又相互配合、相互补充和协调统一,从而形成了健康、有序和高效运作的应对科研不端行为的层级监管机制。证明某项行为是否构成科研不端,要求该项行为必须同时具备以下三个要素：(1)存在一个对有关科研共同体公认惯例的重大背离或违反；(2)所犯的这种不端行为是故意的、不顾后果的；(3)对该不端行为的举报由一个占优势的证据所证明。认定一项科研不端行为不仅需要遵循举报、举报评估、质询、调查、相关机构的监督与评审以及处罚等行政程序,而且需要遵循上诉、听证与司法裁决等法律程序。这种健康、有序、高效运作的层级监管机制以及及时、公正和秘密查处程序,为充分实现由上述制度所规定的权利和义务提供了重要的保证。并且,所有这些理所当然地使得美国成为全世界范围内防范科研不端行为的国家典范。正面临科研不端行为严峻挑战的中国,既制定并实施了具有自己特色的科研不端行为防范体系,也取得了一些较为显著的成效。在一个日益开放和激烈竞争的国际社会里,只要中国敢于面对挑战并善于借鉴美国的有益经验,通过进一步完善自己的防范体系,就一定能够实现既减少不端行为事件的发生数量、降低不端行为的各种损害,又普遍提升诚信意识、学术道德与科研伦理水平的长远目标。更多还原

【Abstract】 During the Knowledge-base economy times when developped countries have finished the turn from the academic science to the post academic science, the trend of integration among S&T and economy is growing enhanced,along with technological activity having been the center of all social ones,especially utilitarian motive has become the most primary power in scientific research.All of these have resulted in scientists’contending against the technological resources with life-and-death, furtherly momentous research misconduct events occurred continually, they becoming more and more rampant, and it has beacome a hotspot, focus,difficulty and great puzzle all over the world. Therefore,with the theory and method of interdisciplinary sciences, both of them will have extraordinary important theoretical values and operation significances:(1)to systematically research the conceptual frame, complex and various causalities,principal paradigms and their perspective transition about research misconduct in theory; (2)to profoundly anlyse,objectively evaluate and fully use for reference with some successful experiences on the guidelines determination, strategy decision-making, institution design, system arrangement, mechanism and procedure operation of the United States in paradigm, for construction of the Chinese prevention and regulation system against research misconduct, positively responding to the serious challenge from the events of research misconduct, real and effective solution of its present principal problems.It constitutes a conceptual frame to rethink about definition, basic features and types of reearch misconduct.Reseach misconduct resulted from the interaction relationships of factors among microcosmic individual layer,middle-cosmic professional community and technological orgnizations, and macroscopical layer of social circumstance, may bring great harmness either about the intrests and fames for oneselves done misconduct,cooperators,others peers,professional communities and even institution itself within social institution of science,or about material and mental harmness for funding research agencies, social institutions,cultural ideas, and even common publics have not trusted on it because of loss of science purity outside. To explore research misconduct there are three major theoretical paradigms and analytical perspectives which are respectively set up by Robert King Merton about the normative structure of the academic science consisted of Communism, Universality, Disinterestedness, Originality and Scepticism (CUDOS),by John Ziman on the normative structure of the postacademic science consisted of Proprietary, Local, Authoritarian, Commissioned and Expert(PLACE), and by some experts on research integrity through the National Academies’organization.Being a kind of uniform relationship between history and logic among these theories represents either a transitions and innovation based on historical inheritance,or respective dependence,coexistence and supplement one another on a logic basic.All of above may not only describle a whole epistemology view to systematically hold research misconduct,but also provide an important guidelines and logic basic for the United States to construct its integrative system of prevention and regulation against research misconduct.In according with the law on the evolution of research misconduct,the transition of two kinds of different strategies responsing to research misconduct were successively implemented by the Amerrican government.The first strategy transition was an single punishment mean from professional ethics to public polices, and the second one was from public policy to a systematic prevention and regulation with all kinds of means including professional ethic,laws, codes and regulations. In the United States the system of prevention and regulation against research misconduct mainly include the following two parts:(1)the first one is consist of policies,codes and regulations directly stating against research misconduct;(2)the second one is that include such as policies on subjects protection and annimals wellfare at experiment, data management, conflict of interest, responsibilities of Supervisors and trainees, cooperative research,authorship and publication,peer review close related to research misconduct.The two parts are either severally dependent or mutual supplement each other,and they has some formative and social functions including punishment, education,prevention and so on against research misconduct. They can provide either a right guidelines, or a firm organizational foundation and a powerful institutional ensure for the layer mechanism of oversee and administration against research misconduct to operate at a health, order and effective way in the United States.A finding of research misconduct made under this part requires:(a) there be a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community; and (b) the misconduct be committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly;and (c) the allegation be proven by a preponderance of the evidence. The determination against a research misconduct must follow not only the administrative procedure step by step from allegation to allegation assessment, inquiry, investigation, correlative agency’s oversight and review and sanctions,etc., but also the legal procedure step by step from appeal to hearing and judicial decision.Along the healthy, order and effective layer mechanism of oversee and administration, with the prompt, fair and confidential procedure on investigating and processing research misconduct, both of them can provide an important ensuring effect for the rights and obligations stated by above systems. Moreover, all of above made the United States become a typical state paradigm dealing with research misconduct all over the world by the nature of things.Faced with a extraordinary severe challenge from research misconduct events, China herself has not only established and implemented a unique prevention and regulation system dealing with research misconduct,but also gained some more remarkable achievements.Being an increasingly open and drastically competition international society,as long as China dared to be up against such a challenge and was good at learning from those useful experiences of the United States,it would be able to realize the final and long-term goal either of reducing amounts and harms at research misconduct events,or at large promoting integrity consciousness,levels of academic moral and scientific ethic.更多还原