Scientific Integrity: Text And Cases In Responsible Conduct Of Research

This was a text for a class I am taking -- I have found it to be easy to understand and helpful.

Is the third time that I have bought this book, and I have used it as base for our graduate students in Pharmacology. I strongly recommend it for future and young scientists. It is a good base for start to deal with future problems in Scientific career.

I was required to buy this book for an ethics course. While the chapters themselves were straightforward, the discussion case studies at the ends of the chapters showed themselves to be outdated. Several of the problems the author posed have been addressed in the years since its 2005 publication. However, it is a very good scientific ethics book, and if there is a new edition I would highly reccomend the text to anyone in need of scientific ethics education.

Needed it for class

Macrina's Scientific Integrity is a sterling example of what is wrong with modern scientific writing both in content and context. The chapters are exceedingly wordy, poorly laid out and often lacking in logical structure, making the text read as though Macrina needed to meet a page limit for the book. The information provided in the chapters is very opinionated and fails to provide objective viewpoints for the arguments they lay out. When opposing viewpoints are presented, they are quickly hobbled by the author using circular logic, specifically omitting details, and other methods of discrediting the information.It is quite clear that Macrina and the other authors are pushing their own agenda, especially when speaking about human and animal research, ironically, the chapter following animal research addresses conflict of interest; Macrina does not disclose his personal conflicts of interest in the preceding chapters. Other chapters in the book make strong and specific claims without providing a single reference for the entire chapter.As a researcher, I find this text to be of mild to moderate usefulness, and even then only specific chapters. It requires the reader to do substantial background research to pick apart fact from opinion. All should be aware of the authors preexisting interests and information in the book be taken with some skepticism.

Good book for the subject. It was meant to meet the NSF and NIH (<-health institute, may be wrong acronym) requirements for grantees and scientific integrity training. However, the reason for low stars is almost every single case is from a medical/biological perspective. The book should be titled "Scientific Integrity: From a Medical Scientist's Perspective " it would get 5 stars for that.

As described

Great.the book is good ,just like a new one.