中西查处重大学术不端行为的机制差异探讨

查处重大学术不端行为需要满足独立调查原则。第一,全球独立调查原则可以多元化理解为,贝尔实验室舍恩事件调查为范例的调查组独立于基层科研机构,美国科研诚信办公室独立于美国公共卫生局的预算体系,及中国等国高级别主管机构介入独立于基层科研机构;第二,全球主管行政机构查处重大学术不端行为满足独立调查原则的有三种模式:美国科研诚信办公室为代表的“压倒性”独立实施调查和判定模式,中国台湾为代表的基层科研机构实施调查、高级别主管机构负责审查和判定模式,及中国内地高级别主管机构展开联合调查模式;第三,联合调查模式体现中国中央政府兼有行政主管和资金资助方的双重角色,联合各方资源保障调查的客观公正和权威性,兼有事中查处,事前预防和事后善治的职能。

This paper focus on the multiple meaning of independence principle.There are three meaning of investigation principle of independence:First,investigation independence from scientific institution in the paragon of the Schon case in Bell Lab,financial independence of Office of Research Integrity from administration office in America,institution independence of higher administration office from the scientific institution.Secondly,according to the meaning of independence,there are three models to investigate severe academic misconduct,overwhelming independence of Office of Research Integrity(ORI)to independently investigate and judge in US,fundamental investigation carried out by scientific institution,and final judge by higher administration in China Taiwan,the unite investigation and judgment which is carried out by the group of higher administration insititution.Thirdly,unite investigation model is the Chinese character administration,owing to the central government have both administration supervision and fund support,which could unite different administration resource to guarantee the objective and authority of investigation.It is function with combination of prevention before the case,investigation in the case and further improvement after the case.