Methoden vergleichen
Prüfen Sie die ausgewählten Methoden nebeneinander; abweichende Zeilen sind hervorgehoben.
| Nürnberger Kodex× | Forschungsmissbrauch× | |
|---|---|---|
| Fachgebiet | Forschungsethik | Forschungsethik |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Entstehungsjahr≠ | 1947 | 2005 |
| Urheber≠ | International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg (Allied Powers) | U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI) / National Science Foundation; International standards via COPE |
| Typ≠ | Framework | Standard |
| Wegweisende Quelle≠ | Nuremberg Military Tribunal. (1947). Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10. United States Government Printing Office. link ↗ | U.S. Office of Research Integrity. (2005). Public Health Service Policy on Research Misconduct. 42 CFR Part 93. Federal Register. link ↗ |
| Aliasnamen≠ | Code of Nuremberg, Ten Principles | FFP, Research Fraud, Scientific Misconduct |
| Verwandt≠ | 4 | 3 |
| Zusammenfassung≠ | The Nuremberg Code (1947) is the first international ethical code governing human experimentation, established by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg following trials of Nazi physicians for conducting torture and unethical experiments on concentration camp prisoners. Its ten principles, led by absolute requirement for voluntary informed consent, became the foundation for all modern research ethics governance and remain the gold standard for protecting research subjects from exploitation and abuse. | Research misconduct comprises intentional or reckless fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, conducting, or reporting research. Formally defined by U.S. federal policy (42 CFR Part 93, Office of Research Integrity), misconduct is distinguished from honest error, negligence, and good-faith disagreements about research methods or interpretation. Misconduct undermines scientific integrity, harms subjects and institutions, wastes research resources, and erodes public trust in science. Allegations are investigated formally with due process; proven misconduct results in sanctions ranging from publication correction to career-ending bans. |
| ScholarGateDatensatz ↗ |
|
|