Abstract
In 1992, two new definitions of scientific misconduct were proposed that differ significantly from those previously adopted by the U.S. National Science Foundation and the U.S. Public Health Service, and many universities. This commentary considers insights underlying the proposals, asks whether the proposals cover the full range of likely serious deviations from accepted practice, and attaches priority to viewing definitions of misconduct in science within the investigative and adjudicative contexts where they operate.

This publication has 1 reference indexed in Scilit: