In defense of the Netherlands code of conduct for research integrity: Response to radder

J. de Ridder*, L. Bouter, T. Haven, R. Peels, J. Tijdink, M.P. Zeegers

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)
68 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

We assess Radder's criticisms of the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity and show that they either miss their mark or depend on controversial background assumptions about the purpose of the Code. Although Radder raises important questions about the broader roles and purposes of research in society, his conclusion that the Code should be revised in the ways he proposes is unjustified.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)276-283
JournalAccountability in Research
Volume30
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2023

Keywords

  • Mertonian norms
  • Netherlands code of conduct for research integrity
  • Research Integrity
  • Responsible research and innovation
  • Patenting

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'In defense of the Netherlands code of conduct for research integrity: Response to radder'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this