2004
Volume 38, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 1573-9775
  • E-ISSN: 2352-1236

Abstract

Abstract

1

Discussions of scientific integrity of research in discourse studies should not be limited to experimental research only, for rules for scientific conduct apply to all sorts of research: experimental and observational, quantitative and qualitative, empirical and theoretical. Nowadays, written codes are available that specify simple and clear principles of honesty, carefulness, reliability, verifiability, impartiality, independence, and responsibility. In response to breaches of these principles, Hornikx and Batenburg (2016) make a plea for new rules and practices that pertain to the macro and the micro level of the scientific ecosystem. Their proposals contain further specifications of available rules for what is logically and socially acceptable and thereby suggest that the present codes do not suffice and that new and stricter rules are an appropriate and effective response to transgressions. It might be wise to consider another question first: Do scientists in our discipline take the existing rules sufficiently serious? My answer, derived from my own experience and environment in research and teaching, is negative. Therefore, rather than new rules, we need more interaction with students, PhD’s and colleagues on matters of integrity.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TVT2016.2.GLOP
2016-09-01
2021-10-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/15739775/38/2/05_TVT2016.2.GLOP.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/TVT2016.2.GLOP&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/TVT2016.2.GLOP
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): code of conduct; control by rules; implicit rules; interaction; scientific integrity
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error