In this paper we suggest a model of sequential auctions with endogenous participation where each bidder conjectures about the number of participants at each round. Then, after learning his value, each bidder decides whether or not to participate in the auction. In the calculation of his expected value, each bidder uses his conjectures about the number of participants for each possible subgroup. In equilibrium, the conjectured probability is compatible with the probability of staying in the auction. In our model, players (...) face participation costs, bidders may buy as many objects as they wish and they are allowed to drop out at any round. Bidders can drop out at any time, but they cannot come back to the auction. In particular we can determine the number of participants and expected prices in equilibrium. We show that for any bidding strategy, there exists such a probability of staying in the auction. For the case of stochastically independent objects, we show that in equilibrium every bidder who decides to continue submits a bid that is equal to his value at each round. When objects are stochastically identical, we are able to show that expected prices are decreasing. (shrink)

O caráter polêmico e a relevância da obra de David Hume são indisputáveis. Neste livro, discute-se a visão do filósofo sobre a teoria do conhecimento e da ciência, além de tópicos mais particulares, mas nem por isso menos cruciais, como sua crítica ao finalismo, sua relevância para a leitura de Freud e a tese humeana, retomada por Quine, da continuidade entre conhecimento comum e teórico.

O objetivo deste artigo é discutir três problemas centrais na filosofia de David Hume. O primeiro é o do papel da associação de idéias: no Tratado há dois conceitos distintos dessa associação, falha corrigida na primeira Investigação, em que é eliminado o conceito de “associação costumeira” e não se atribui à associação qualquer papel na formação de inferências causais. O segundo diz respeito ao verdadeiro papel da indução. A filosofia humeana trata da descoberta dos poderes causais dos objetos, sem nunca (...) se ocupar de generalizações acerca de qualidades sensíveis. Hume descobriu o problema da “indução causal”, mas apenas como conseqüência de sua análise da inferência causal. O último de nossos problemas é o do exato conceito humeano daquele instinto que ele chama de “costume ou hábito”. O princípio de Hume mostra ser apenas uma sensibilidade à repetição de conjunções, sendo relevante apenas o elemento “repetição”, sem haver qualquer influência significativa da passagem do tempo, o que impede a interpretação desse princípio como “habituação” ou algo equivalente. Hume: three majors problemsThis article aims to discuss three central problems in David Hume’s philosophy. A first central problem in Hume’s philosophy concerns the role of the association of ideas: there are in the Treatise two distinct concepts of this association, a negligence that was corrected in the first Enquiry, where the concept of “customary association” is eliminated and no role is assigned to association in the formation of causal beliefs. The second is about the real meaning of induction. Hume’s philosophy discusses the discovery of the causal powers of objects, setting aside any generalisation about sensible qualities. Hume did discover the problem of “causal induction”, but only as a consequence of his analysis of causal inference. The last of our three problems concerns the exact Humean concept of the instinct he calls “custom or habit”. It is noticeable that Hume´s principle is just sensitiveness to the repetition of conjunctions, with no meaningful influence of the passage of time, and this goes against any interpretation of this principle as “becoming accustomed” or anything of the kind. (shrink)

O objetivo deste artigo é discutir três problemas centrais na filosofia de David Hume. O primeiro é o do papel da associação de idéias: no Tratado há dois conceitos distintos dessa associação, falha corrigida na primeira Investigação, em que é eliminado o conceito de “associação costumeira” e não se atribui à associação qualquer papel na formação de inferências causais. O segundo diz respeito ao verdadeiro papel da indução. A filosofia humeana trata da descoberta dos poderes causais dos objetos, sem nunca (...) se ocupar de generalizações acerca de qualidades sensíveis. Hume descobriu o problema da “indução causal”, mas apenas como conseqüência de sua análise da inferência causal. O último de nossos problemas é o do exato conceito humeano daquele instinto que ele chama de “costume ou hábito”. O princípio de Hume mostra ser apenas uma sensibilidade à repetição de conjunções, sendo relevante apenas o elemento “repetição”, sem haver qualquer influência significativa da passagem do tempo, o que impede a interpretação desse princípio como “habituação” ou algo equivalente. Hume: three majors problems Abstract This article aims to discuss three central problems in David Hume’s philosophy. A first central problem in Hume’s philosophy concerns the role of the association of ideas: there are in the Treatise two distinct concepts of this association, a negligence that was corrected in the first Enquiry, where the concept of “customary association” is eliminated and no role is assigned to association in the formation of causal beliefs. The second is about the real meaning of induction. Hume’s philosophy discusses the discovery of the causal powers of objects, setting aside any generalisation about sensible qualities. Hume did discover the problem of “causal induction”, but only as a consequence of his analysis of causal inference. The last of our three problems concerns the exact Humean concept of the instinct he calls “custom or habit”. It is noticeable that Hume´s principle is just sensitiveness to the repetition of conjunctions, with no meaningful influence of the passage of time, and this goes against any interpretation of this principle as “becoming accustomed” or anything of the kind. (shrink)

O povo Kaingang é o mais populoso do Sul do Brasil e está entre os mais numerosos povos indígenas do país. Neste trabalho faz-se uma relação entre as informações encontradas na literatura e a atualidade na Terra Indígena Kaingang em relação ao conhecimento que possuem sobre o uso de plantas para a cura de doenças e como interpretam a ação da erva no organismo. Para isto, realizou-se uma pesquisa de campo em uma Terra Indígena Kaingang no Paraná, cujo entrevistas forneceram (...) confirmações históricas em relação aos etnoconhecimentos da etnia, da evolução dos aspectos químicos e das atitudes perante a química e os remédios de origem farmacêutica e natural. (shrink)

Russell's The Problems of Philosophy tries to establish a new theory of induction, at the same time that Hume is there accused of an irrational/ scepticism about induction". But a careful analysis of the theory of knowledge explicitly acknowledged by Hume reveals that, contrary to the standard interpretation in the XXth century, possibly influenced by Russell, Hume deals exclusively with causal inference (which he never classifies as "causal induction", although now we are entitled to do so), never with inductive inference (...) in general, mainly generalizations about sensible qualities of objects ( whether, e.g., "all crows are black" or not is not among Hume's concerns). Russell's theories are thus only false alternatives to Hume's, in (1912) or in his (1948). (shrink)

A partir de uma pesquisa bibliográfica de caráter qualitativo, este artigo busca identificar o potencial do relato de reformular a teoria moral da dignidade humana, tornando a normatividade dela decorrente sensível às peculiaridades das minorias sociais. Este trabalho, dentre várias outras produções, tem como referencial teórico principal a obra Torture and Dignity: An Essay on Moral Injury (2015), de Jay Bernstein, além de utilizar, para fins de compreensão do caráter intergeracional do relato, o livro O que os cegos estão sonhando? (...) (2012), organizada por Noemi Jaffe. Estabelecido tal panorama, busca-se discutir a hipótese de que o relato possui funções subjetivas, morais e sociais que, juntas, são capazes de fazer com que o indivíduo retome o controle de seu corpo após experiências de degradação, senso de corporeidade esse que, ao tornar igualmente relevantes os aspectos voluntário e involuntário do ser, tornam contextuais as concepções de dignidade humana e de Direitos Humanos. (shrink)

The associationist interpretation of Hume's account of causal belief is criticized. The origin of this mistaken interpretation is explained. The difference between Hume's views in the Treatise of Human Nature and in An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding is examined.

Diversos argumentos de Bergson. Frege, Sellars. Quinc e outros filósofos podem servir como quadro de referência para uma concepção parcimoniosa da consciência, como disposição de nosso organismo para apreender seus próprios estados. O conhecimento do ambiente em nosso redor e da maior parte dos aspectos do próprio corpo é adquirido indiretamente por essas apreensões, cujo exemplo paradigmático poderia ser a idéia bergsoniana da captação direta da realidade de nosso corpo. Desta perspectiva, o espírito ou mente pode ser concebido como “consciência (...) da consciência”, mas seu conceito não tem qualquer outra utilidade. Basicamente, corpo e consciência são tudo o que temos. (shrink)

Radical skepticism, irrationalism, psychologism, and epistemological despair are popular interpretations of Hume. The theory of causal inference has been supposed to stand at the very heart of Humean skepticism, mainly because of its ‘associationism’. However, the myth of a skeptical Hume—more radical than he really is in his own admitted ‘mitigated skepticism’—has been discredited in recent years. Hume certainly was an associationist about the passions, and moral sentiments, and the rules of justice in society, and many other aspects of human (...) life, as different as literary taste and superstition. There is plenty of evidence of this in Books II and III of the Treatise, in the second Enquiry, in the Dissertation on the Passions and in the Essays. But my main point here is that association of ideas has no cognitive role in his philosophy, beyond serving as “the cement of complex ideas.” Custom or habit do have such a cognitive role, as is well known, and shall be discussed below. (shrink)

Hume é conhecido por sua teoria da indução por repetição, mas em sua filosofia há lugar para inferências derivadas de experiências singulares. Parte do fundamento destas inferências depende de uma regra newtoniana, mas é preciso acrescentar a especificação do tipo de classe de objetos a que pertencem tanto a causa como o efeito – de um modo que pode esclarecer a exata natureza do “empirismo” humiano.

A desigualdade da condição feminina tem como ponto central na análise de Hume a diferença nas atitudes da sociedade perante o dever de castidade. Esta é explicada – pela incerteza da paternidade e suas consequências -, mas nem por isso justificada. Hume aponta também outras desigualdades derivadas de privilégios masculinos injustificáveis. Como no caso das linhagem de nobreza e sobretudo no caso dos fenômenos de sujeição das mulheres pelos homens, que compara aos fenômenos históricos de opressão étnica.

A presente proposta tem por objetivo refletir sobre a experiência didático­ pedagógica dos Laboratórios de Pesquisa e Prática de Ensino em Ciências Sociais – LAPPCS, componente curricular necessário à formação de professores de sociologia para o ensino médio, do Curso de Licenciatura em Ciências Sociais, do Centro de Desenvolvimento Sustentável do Semiárido – CDSA/UFCG. Os LAPPCS podem ser caracterizados como espaços de análise crítico­reflexivo das escolas de Ensino Médio, predominantemente, em suas dimensões organizacional, pedagógica e cultural, nos quais se analisa (...) o trabalho docente com os diferentes sujeitos da aprendizagem: crianças, adolescentes, jovens e adultos do campo e da cidade. A pesquisa, como prática contínua, constitui uma ferramenta fundamental para os LAPPCS, possibilitando, ao futuro docente, diagnosticar situações relacionadas com o sujeito da aprendizagem, elaborar ações planejadas, executá­las e avaliá­las, contribuindo para que o fenômeno educativo aconteça de forma satisfatória, contextualizada e intercultural. (shrink)

We cannot assert the existence of a real world subsisting in and by itself, independently of our cognitive construction. There are several contemporary variants of the Kantian negation of the possibility to know things as they are in themselves. We are unable to apprehend the world as it is, for the world is a construction by the knowing subject, not a set of autonomous objects. But at least one aspect of the causal properties of objects cannot be viewed in terms (...) of a radical constructivism, or perspectivism. It would be senseless to attribute to the subject alone the construction of causal constraints from which depends her own survival. The sensible properties of objects, or their positions in space and time, depend from a given perspective. But if their causal properties had he same dependence, the subject herself, who is supposed to be a living being, would establish the causal conditions of her own survival. From this would follow an absurdity: the lethal properties of things would act or not act on living beings depending from the way they themselves construct those properties. The simple possibility of death should prevent us from considering causal connections as appearances, although causal inferences are obviously part of our acts of construction. (shrink)

A coherent perspectivism should be moderate - or mitigated. It only becomes meaningful against a transperspective background, which is part of both Hume's and Nietzsche's legacies, a "minimalist" conception of causation. Metaphysical necessity must be excluded, but not a naturalistic, Humean harmony between causal thinking and the real world. One without which even Nietzsche's "mistakes with survival value" would hardly make any sense. It is thus that a plausible perspectivism may distinguish itself from mere rhetoric, scepticism, or relativism.

An article by Moulines presents an interesting argument against semantic realism, using Calderôn’s play La Vida en Sueño as a literary device to develop his point. He introduces in the play a new character, a realist philosopher who tries to persuade Prince Segismund to abandon the anti-realist position he maintains, after the experience he undergoes in the play. I introduce a second imaginary realist, who argues for conjectural realism instead of the semantic variety, by means of several sceptical arguments intended (...) to defeat scepticism itself, throwing it in the same boat as anti-realist solipsism. (shrink)

Como o solipsismo metodológico, recusando tanto o "pós-modernismo relativista", o "neo-iluminismo" e qualquer espécie de fundacionismo, pode estabelecer um núcleo de verdades imunes ao ceticismo radical? A supra-conjecturalidade deste solipsismo é o expediente metodológico que baliza as escolhas neste âmbito mais amplo que é o da conjecturalidade. Se neste território a falibilidade é sempre possível, também é nele que se encontra a única racionalidade que somos capazes de constituir. E também as melhores teorias capazes de dar conta de nossas experiências.

Climate change exposes ecological and socio-economic systems to risks. The identified disparities in knowledge about the social climate system are at the root of the difficulties in perceiving and understanding the diversity of risks related to climate change. The still huge gap between what science and technological innovation can contribute to mitigation and what is unmanageable by humans inevitably requires a continuous process of adaptation. This work is part of the research associated with the European project (under the ERA4CS) 'Citizen (...) Sensing - Urban climate resilience through participatory risk management systems', which proposes to develop a Participatory Climate Risk Management System, a two-way communication system where is part of a participatory risk management system, contributing to adaptive governance. These objectives will be achieved through the creation of a platform that will incorporate information gathered from four pilot studies: Norrköping (Sweden), Porto (Portugal), Rotterdam (The Netherlands) and Trondheim (Norway). Ultimately, the aim is to draw conclusions on how this application can contribute to improving citizens' literacy to cope with climate change adaptation and to raise awareness of this problem, as the involvement of citizens and stakeholders will only be improved if the perception of the risk of climate change is substantially increased. Awareness campaigns about the potential risks associated with extreme events are of great importance. Citizens tend to view climate change as a global phenomenon, ignoring and avoiding taking action until it is directly and seriously affected. (shrink)

A INDEVIDA CRIMINALIZAÇÃO DA MORALIDADE:O CRIME DE CASA DE PROSTITUIÇÃO SOB O PRISMA DO PATERNALISMO PENAL.

ENTREVISTA COM PROFESSORAS(ES) DE FILOSOFIA DO ENSINO FUNDAMENTAL DO CEARÁCom: Jocilaine Moreira Batista do Vale, Mario Jonny de Castro Cunha, Syssa AdleyRodrigues Monteiro, Fabiana Martins TôrresPor: Antônio Alex Pereira de Sousa, Paulo Willame Araújo de Lim.

Table of contentsI1 Proceedings of the 4th World Conference on Research IntegrityConcurrent Sessions:1. Countries' systems and policies to foster research integrityCS01.1 Second time around: Implementing and embedding a review of responsible conduct of research policy and practice in an Australian research-intensive universitySusan Patricia O'BrienCS01.2 Measures to promote research integrity in a university: the case of an Asian universityDanny Chan, Frederick Leung2. Examples of research integrity education programmes in different countriesCS02.1 Development of a state-run “cyber education program of research ethics” in (...) KoreaEun Jung Ko, Jin Sun Kwak, TaeHwan Gwon, Ji Min Lee, Min-Ho LeeCS02.3 Responsible conduct of research teachers’ training courses in Germany: keeping on drilling through hard boards for more RCR teachersHelga Nolte, Michael Gommel, Gerlinde Sponholz3. The research environment and policies to encourage research integrityCS03.1 Challenges and best practices in research integrity: bridging the gap between policy and practiceYordanka Krastev, Yamini Sandiran, Julia Connell, Nicky SolomonCS03.2 The Slovenian initiative for better research: from national activities to global reflectionsUrsa Opara Krasovec, Renata SribarCS03.3 Organizational climate assessments to support research integrity: background of the Survey of Organizational Research Climate and the experience with its use at Michigan State UniversityBrian C. Martinson, Carol R. Thrush, C.K. Gunsalus4. Expressions of concern and retractionsCS04.1 Proposed guidelines for retraction notices and their disseminationIvan Oransky, Adam MarcusCS04.2 Watching retractions: analysis of process and practice, with data from the Wiley retraction archivesChris Graf, Verity Warne, Edward Wates, Sue JoshuaCS04.3 An exploratory content analysis of Expressions of ConcernMiguel RoigCS04.4 An ethics researcher in the retraction processMichael Mumford5. Funders' role in fostering research integrityCS05.1 The Fonds de Recherche du Québec’s institutional rules on the responsible conduct of research: introspection in the funding agency activitiesMylène Deschênes, Catherine Olivier, Raphaëlle Dupras-LeducCS05.2 U.S. Public Health Service funds in an international setting: research integrity and complianceZoë Hammatt, Raju Tamot, Robin Parker, Cynthia Ricard, Loc Nguyen-Khoa, Sandra TitusCS05.3 Analyzing decision making of funders of public research as a case of information asymmetryKarsten Klint JensenCS05.4 Research integrity management: Empirical investigation of academia versus industrySimon Godecharle, Ben Nemery, Kris Dierickx5A: Education: For whom, how, and what?CS05A.1 Research integrity or responsible conduct of research? What do we aim for?Mickey Gjerris, Maud Marion Laird Eriksen, Jeppe Berggren HoejCS05A.2 Teaching and learning about RCR at the same time: a report on Epigeum’s RCR poll questions and other assessment activitiesNicholas H. SteneckCS05A.4 Minding the gap in research ethics education: strategies to assess and improve research competencies in community health workers/promoteresCamille Nebeker, Michael Kalichman, Elizabeth Mejia Booen, Blanca Azucena Pacheco, Rebeca Espinosa Giacinto, Sheila Castaneda6. Country examples of research reward systems and integrityCS06.1 Improving systems to promote responsible research in the Chinese Academy of SciencesDing Li, Qiong Chen, Guoli Zhu, Zhonghe SunCS06.4 Exploring the perception of research integrity amongst public health researchers in IndiaParthasarathi Ganguly, Barna Ganguly7. Education and guidance on research integrity: country differencesCS07.1 From integrity to unity: how research integrity guidance differs across universities in Europe.Noémie Aubert Bonn, Kris Dierickx, Simon GodecharleCS07.2 Can education and training develop research integrity? The spirit of the UNESCO 1974 recommendation and its updatingDaniele Bourcier, Jacques Bordé, Michèle LeducCS07.3 The education and implementation mechanisms of research ethics in Taiwan's higher education: an experience in Chinese web-based curriculum development for responsible conduct of researchChien Chou, Sophia Jui-An PanCS07.4 Educating principal investigators in Swiss research institutions: present and future perspectivesLouis Xaver Tiefenauer8. Measuring and rewarding research productivityCS08.1 Altimpact: how research integrity underpins research impactDaniel Barr, Paul TaylorCS08.2 Publication incentives: just reward or misdirection of funds?Lyn Margaret HornCS08.3 Why Socrates never charged a fee: factors contributing to challenges for research integrity and publication ethicsDeborah Poff9. Plagiarism and falsification: Behaviour and detectionCS09.1 Personality traits predict attitude towards plagiarism of self and others in biomedicine: plagiarism, yes we can?Martina Mavrinac, Gordana Brumini, Mladen PetrovečkiCS09.2 Investigating the concept of and attitudes toward plagiarism for science teachers in Brazil: any challenges for research integrity and policy?Christiane Coelho Santos, Sonia VasconcelosCS09.3 What have we learnt?: The CrossCheck Service from CrossRefRachael LammeyCS09.4 High p-values as a sign of data fabrication/falsificationChris Hartgerink, Marcel van Assen, Jelte Wicherts10. Codes for research integrity and collaborationsCS10.1 Research integrity in cross-border cooperation: a Nordic exampleHanne Silje HaugeCS10.3 Research integrity, research misconduct, and the National Science Foundation's requirement for the responsible conduct of researchAaron MankaCS10.4 A code of conduct for international scientific cooperation: human rights and research integrity in scientific collaborations with international academic and industry partnersRaffael Iturrizaga11. Countries' efforts to establish mentoring and networksCS11.1 ENRIO : a network facilitating common approaches on research integrity in EuropeNicole FoegerCS11.2 Helping junior investigators develop in a resource-limited country: a mentoring program in PeruA. Roxana Lescano, Claudio Lanata, Gissella Vasquez, Leguia Mariana, Marita Silva, Mathew Kasper, Claudia Montero, Daniel Bausch, Andres G LescanoCS11.3 Netherlands Research Integrity Network: the first six monthsFenneke Blom, Lex BouterCS11.4 A South African framework for research ethics and integrity for researchers, postgraduate students, research managers and administratorsLaetus OK Lategan12. Training and education in research integrity at an early career stageCS12.1 Research integrity in curricula for medical studentsGustavo Fitas ManaiaCS12.2 Team-based learning for training in the responsible conduct of research supports ethical decision-makingWayne T. McCormack, William L. Allen, Shane Connelly, Joshua Crites, Jeffrey Engler, Victoria Freedman, Cynthia W. Garvan, Paul Haidet, Joel Hockensmith, William McElroy, Erik Sander, Rebecca Volpe, Michael F. VerderameCS12.4 Research integrity and career prospects of junior researchersSnezana Krstic13. Systems and research environments in institutionsCS13.1 Implementing systems in research institutions to improve quality and reduce riskLouise HandyCS13.2 Creating an institutional environment that supports research integrityDebra Schaller-DemersCS13.3 Ethics and Integrity Development Grants: a mechanism to foster cultures of ethics and integrityPaul Taylor, Daniel BarrCS13.4 A culture of integrity at KU LeuvenInge Lerouge, Gerard Cielen, Liliane Schoofs14. Peer review and its role in research integrityCS14.1 Peer review research across disciplines: transdomain action in the European Cooperation in Science and Technology “New Frontiers of Peer Review ”Ana Marusic, Flaminio SquazzoniCS14.2 Using blinding to reduce bias in peer reviewDavid VauxCS14.3 How to intensify the role of reviewers to promote research integrityKhalid Al-Wazzan, Ibrahim AlorainyCS14.4 Credit where credit’s due: professionalizing and rewarding the role of peer reviewerChris Graf, Verity Warne15. Research ethics and oversight for research integrity: Does it work?CS15.1 The psychology of decision-making in research ethics governance structures: a theory of bounded rationalityNolan O'Brien, Suzanne Guerin, Philip DoddCS15.2 Investigator irregularities: iniquity, ignorance or incompetence?Frank Wells, Catherine BlewettCS15.3 Academic plagiarismFredric M. Litto16. Research integrity in EuropeCS16.1 Whose responsibility is it anyway?: A comparative analysis of core concepts and practice at European research-intensive universities to identify and develop good practices in research integrityItziar De Lecuona, Erika Löfstrom, Katrien MaesCS16.2 Research integrity guidance in European research universitiesKris Dierickx, Noémie Bonn, Simon GodecharleCS16.3 Research Integrity: processes and initiatives in Science Europe member organisationsTony Peatfield, Olivier Boehme, Science Europe Working Group on Research IntegrityCS16.4 Promoting research integrity in Italy: the experience of the Research Ethics and Bioethics Advisory Committee of the Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche Cinzia Caporale, Daniele Fanelli17. Training programs for research integrity at different levels of experience and seniorityCS17.1 Meaningful ways to incorporate research integrity and the responsible conduct of research into undergraduate, graduate, postdoctoral and faculty training programsJohn Carfora, Eric Strauss, William LynnCS17.2 "Recognize, respond, champion": Developing a one-day interactive workshop to increase confidence in research integrity issuesDieter De Bruyn, Bracke Nele, Katrien De Gelder, Stefanie Van der BurghtCS17.4 “Train the trainer” on cultural challenges imposed by international research integrity conversations: lessons from a projectJosé Roberto Lapa e Silva, Sonia M. R. Vasconcelos18. Research and societal responsibilityCS18.1 Promoting the societal responsibility of research as an integral part of research integrityHelene IngierdCS18.2 Social responsibility as an ethical imperative for scientists: research, education and service to societyMark FrankelCS18.3 The intertwined nature of social responsibility and hope in scienceDaniel Vasgird, Stephanie BirdCS18.4 Common barriers that impede our ability to create a culture of trustworthiness in the research communityMark Yarborough19. Publication ethicsCS19.1 The authors' forum: A proposed tool to improve practices of journal editors and promote a responsible research environmentIbrahim Alorainy, Khalid Al-WazzanCS19.2 Quantifying research integrity and its impact with text analyticsHarold GarnerCS19.3 A closer look at authorship and publication ethics of multi- and interdisciplinary teamsLisa Campo-Engelstein, Zubin Master, Elise Smith, David Resnik, Bryn Williams-JonesCS19.4 Invisibility of duplicate publications in biomedicineMario Malicki, Ana Utrobicic, Ana Marusic20. The causes of bad and wasteful research: What can we do?CS20.1 From countries to individuals: unravelling the causes of bias and misconduct with multilevel meta-meta-analysisDaniele Fanelli, John PA IoannidisCS20.2 Reducing research waste by integrating systems of oversight and regulationGerben ter Riet, Tom Walley, Lex Marius BouterCS20.3 What are the determinants of selective reporting?: The example of palliative care for non-cancer conditionsJenny van der Steen, Lex BouterCS20.4 Perceptions of plagiarism, self-plagiarism and redundancy in research: preliminary results from a national survey of Brazilian PhDsSonia Vasconcelos, Martha Sorenson, Francisco Prosdocimi, Hatisaburo Masuda, Edson Watanabe, José Carlos Pinto, Marisa Palácios, José Lapa e Silva, Jacqueline Leta, Adalberto Vieyra, André Pinto, Mauricio Sant’Ana, Rosemary Shinkai21. Are there country-specific elements of misconduct?CS21.1 The battle with plagiarism in Russian science: latest developmentsBoris YudinCS21.2 Researchers between ethics and misconduct: A French survey on social representations of misconduct and ethical standards within the scientific communityEtienne Vergès, Anne-Sophie Brun-Wauthier, Géraldine VialCS21.3 Experience from different ways of dealing with research misconduct and promoting research integrity in some Nordic countriesTorkild VintherCS21.4 Are there specifics in German research misconduct and the ways to cope with it?Volker Bähr, Charité22. Research integrity teaching programmes and their challengesCS22.1 Faculty mentors and research integrityMichael Kalichman, Dena PlemmonsCS22.2 Training the next generation of scientists to use principles of research quality assurance to improve data integrity and reliabilityRebecca Lynn Davies, Katrina LaubeCS22.3 Fostering research integrity in a culturally-diverse environmentCynthia Scheopner, John GallandCS22.4 Towards a standard retraction formHervé Maisonneuve, Evelyne Decullier23. Commercial research and integrityCS23.1 The will to commercialize: matters of concern in the cultural economy of return-on-investment researchBrian NobleCS23.2 Quality in drug discovery data reporting: a mission impossible?Anja Gilis, David J. Gallacher, Tom Lavrijssen, Malwitz David, Malini Dasgupta, Hans MolsCS23.3 Instituting a research integrity policy in the context of semi-private-sector funding: an example in the field of occupational health and safetyPaul-Emile Boileau24. The interface of publication ethics and institutional policiesCS24.1 The open access ethical paradox in an open government effortTony SavardCS24.2 How journals and institutions can work together to promote responsible conductEric MahCS24.3 Improving cooperation between journals and research institutions in research integrity casesElizabeth Wager, Sabine Kleinert25. Reproducibility of research and retractionsCS25.1 Promoting transparency in publications to reduce irreproducibilityVeronique Kiermer, Andrew Hufton, Melanie ClyneCS25.2 Retraction notices issued for publications by Latin American authors: what lessons can we learn?Sonia Vasconcelos, Renan Moritz Almeida, Aldo Fontes-Pereira, Fernanda Catelani, Karina RochaCS25.3 A preliminary report of the findings from the Reproducibility Project: Cancer biologyElizabeth Iorns, William Gunn26. Research integrity and specific country initiativesCS26.1 Promoting research integrity at CNRS, FranceMichèle Leduc, Lucienne LetellierCS26.2 In pursuit of compliance: is the tail wagging the dog?Cornelia MalherbeCS26.3 Newly established research integrity policies and practices: oversight systems of Japanese research universitiesTakehito Kamata27. Responsible conduct of research and country guidelinesCS27.1 Incentives or guidelines? Promoting responsible research communication through economic incentives or ethical guidelines?Vidar EnebakkCS27.3 Responsible conduct of research: a view from CanadaLynn PenrodCS27.4 The Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity: a national initiative to promote research integrity in DenmarkThomas Nørgaard, Charlotte Elverdam28. Behaviour, trust and honestyCS28.1 The reasons behind non-ethical behaviour in academiaYves FassinCS28.2 The psychological profile of the dishonest scholarCynthia FekkenCS28.3 Considering the implications of Dan Ariely’s keynote speech at the 3rd World Conference on Research Integrity in MontréalJamal Adam, Melissa S. AndersonCS28.4 Two large surveys on psychologists’ views on peer review and replicationJelte WichertsBrett Buttliere29. Reporting and publication bias and how to overcome itCS29.1 Data sharing: Experience at two open-access general medical journalsTrish GrovesCS29.2 Overcoming publication bias and selective reporting: completing the published recordDaniel ShanahanCS29.3 The EQUATOR Network: promoting responsible reporting of health research studiesIveta Simera, Shona Kirtley, Eleana Villanueva, Caroline Struthers, Angela MacCarthy, Douglas Altman30. The research environment and its implications for integrityCS30.1 Ranking of scientists: the Russian experienceElena GrebenshchikovaCS30.4 From cradle to grave: research integrity, research misconduct and cultural shiftsBronwyn Greene, Ted RohrPARTNER SYMPOSIAPartner Symposium AOrganized by EQUATOR Network, Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health ResearchP1 Can we trust the medical research literature?: Poor reporting and its consequencesIveta SimeraP2 What can BioMed Central do to improve published research?Daniel Shanahan, Stephanie HarrimanP3 What can a "traditional" journal do to improve published research?Trish GrovesP4 Promoting good reporting practice for reliable and usable research papers: EQUATOR Network, reporting guidelines and other initiativesCaroline StruthersPartner Symposium COrganized by ENRIO, the European Network of Research Integrity OfficersP5 Transparency and independence in research integrity investigations in EuropeKrista Varantola, Helga Nolte, Ursa Opara, Torkild Vinther, Elizabeth Wager, Thomas NørgaardPartner Symposium DOrganized by IEEE, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics EngineersRe-educating our author community: IEEE's approach to bibliometric manipulation, plagiarism, and other inappropriate practicesP6 Dealing with plagiarism in the connected world: An Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers perspectiveJon RokneP7 Should evaluation of raises, promotion, and research proposals be tied to bibliometric indictors? What the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers is doing to answer this questionGianluca SettiP8 Recommended practices to ensure conference content qualityGordon MacPhersonPartner Symposium EOrganized by the Committee on Freedom and Responsibility in the Conduct of Science of ICSU, the International Council for ScienceResearch assessment and quality in science: perspectives from international science and policy organisationsP9 Challenges for science and the problems of assessing researchEllen HazelkornP10 Research assessment and science policy developmentCarthage SmithP11 Research integrity in South Africa: the value of procedures and processes to global positioningRobert H. McLaughlinP12 Rewards, careers and integrity: perspectives of young scientists from around the worldTatiana Duque MartinsPartner Symposium FOrganized by the Online Resource Center for Ethics Education in Engineering and Science / Center for Engineering, Ethics, and Society of the National Academy of EngineeringP13 Research misconduct: conceptions and policy solutionsTetsuya Tanimoto, Nicholas Steneck, Daniele Fanelli, Ragnvald Kalleberg, Tajammul HusseinPartner Symposium HOrganized by ORI, the Office of Research Integrity; Universitas 21; and the Asia Pacific Research Integrity NetworkP14 International integrity networks: working together to ensure research integrityPing Sun, Ovid Tzeng, Krista Varantola, Susan ZimmermanPartner Symposium IOrganized by COPE, the Committee on Publication EthicsPublication without borders: Ethical challenges in a globalized worldP15 Authorship: credit and responsibility, including issues in large and interdisciplinary studiesRosemary ShinkaiPartner Symposium JOrganized by CITI, the Cooperative Institutional Training InitiativeExperiences on research integrity educational programs in Colombia, Costa Rica and PeruP16 Experiences in PeruRoxana LescanoP17 Experiences in Costa RicaElizabeth HeitmanP18 Experiences in ColumbiaMaria Andrea Rocio del Pilar Contreras NietoPoster Session B: Education, training, promotion and policyPT.01 The missing role of journal editors in promoting responsible researchIbrahim Alorainy, Khalid Al-WazzanPT.02 Honorary authorship in Taiwan: why and who should be in charge?Chien Chou, Sophia Jui-An PanPT.03 Authorship and citation manipulation in academic researchEric Fong, Al WilhitePT.04 Open peer review of research submission at medical journals: experience at BMJ Open and The BMJTrish GrovesPT.05 Exercising authorship: claiming rewards, practicing integrityDésirée Motta-RothPT.07 Medical scientists' views on publication culture: a focus group studyJoeri Tijdink, Yvo SmuldersPoster Session B: Education, training, promotion and policyPT.09 Ethical challenges in post-graduate supervisionLaetus OK LateganPT.10 The effects of viable ethics instruction on international studentsMichael Mumford, Logan Steele, Logan Watts, James Johnson, Shane Connelly, Lee WilliamsPT.11 Does language reflect the quality of research?Gerben ter Riet, Sufia Amini, Lotty Hooft, Halil KilicogluPT.12 Integrity complaints as a strategic tool in policy decision conflictsJanneke van Seters, Herman Eijsackers, Fons Voragen, Akke van der Zijpp and Frans BromPoster Session C: Ethics and integrity intersectionsPT.14 Regulations of informed consent: university-supported research processes and pitfalls in implementationBadaruddin Abbasi, Naif Nasser AlmasoudPT.15 A review of equipoise as a requirement in clinical trialsAdri LabuschagnePT.16 The Research Ethics Library: online resource for research ethics educationJohanne Severinsen, Espen EnghPT.17 Research integrity: the view from King Abdulaziz City for Science and TechnologyDaham Ismail AlaniPT. 18 Meeting global challenges in high-impact publications and research integrity: the case of the Malaysian Palm Oil BoardHJ. Kamaruzaman JusoffPT.19 University faculty perceptions of research practices and misconductAnita Gordon, Helen C. HartonPoster Session D: International perspectivesPT.21 The Commission for Scientific Integrity as a response to research fraudDieter De Bruyn, Stefanie Van der BurghtPT. 22 Are notions of the responsible conduct of research associated with compliance with requirements for research on humans in different disciplinary traditions in Brazil?Karina de Albuquerque Rocha, Sonia Maria Ramos de VasconcelosPT.23 Creating an environment that promotes research integrity: an institutional model of Malawi Liverpool Welcome TrustLimbanazo MatandikaPT.24 How do science policies in Brazil influence user-engaged ecological research?Aline Carolina de Oliveira Machado Prata, Mark William NeffPoster Session E: Perspectives on misconductPT.26 What “causes” scientific misconduct?: Testing major hypotheses by comparing corrected and retracted papersDaniele Fanelli, Rodrigo Costas, Vincent LarivièrePT.27 Perception of academic plagiarism among dentistry studentsDouglas Leonardo Gomes Filho, Diego Oliveira GuedesPT. 28 a few bad apples?: Prevalence, patterns and attitudes towards scientific misconduct among doctoral students at a German university hospitalVolker Bähr, Niklas Keller, Markus Feufel, Nikolas OffenhauserPT. 29 Analysis of retraction notices published by BioMed CentralMaria K. Kowalczuk, Elizabeth C. MoylanPT.31 "He did it" doesn't work: data security, incidents and partnersKatie SpeanburgPoster Session F: Views from the disciplinesPT.32 Robust procedures: a key to generating quality results in drug discoveryMalini Dasgupta, Mariusz Lubomirski, Tom Lavrijssen, David Malwitz, David Gallacher, Anja GillisPT.33 Health promotion: criteria for the design and the integrity of a research projectMaria Betânia de Freitas Marques, Laressa Lima Amâncio, Raphaela Dias Fernandes, Oliveira Patrocínio, and Cláudia Maria Correia Borges RechPT.34 Integrity of academic work from the perspective of students graduating in pharmacy: a brief research studyMaria Betânia de Freitas Marques, Cláudia Maria Correia Borges Rech, Adriana Nascimento SousaPT.35 Research integrity promotion in the Epidemiology and Health Services, the journal of the Brazilian Unified Health SystemLeila Posenato GarciaPT.36 When are clinical trials registered? An analysis of prospective versus retrospective registration of clinical trials published in the BioMed Central series, UKStephanie Harriman, Jigisha PatelPT.37 Maximizing welfare while promoting innovation in drug developmentFarida LadaOther posters that will be displayed but not presented orally:PT.38 Geoethics and the debate on research integrity in geosciencesGiuseppe Di Capua, Silvia PeppoloniPT.39 Introducing the Professionalism and Integrity in Research Program James M. DuBois, John Chibnall, Jillon Van der WallPT.40 Validation of the professional decision-making in research measureJames M. DuBois, John Chibnall, Jillon Van der Wall, Raymond TaitPT.41 General guidelines for research ethicsJacob HolenPT. 42 A national forum for research ethicsAdele Flakke Johannessen, Torunn EllefsenPT.43 Evaluation of integrity in coursework: an approach from the perspective of the higher education professorClaudia Rech, Adriana Sousa, Maria Betânia de Freitas MarquesPT.44 Principles of geoethics and research integrity applied to the European Multidisciplinary Seafloor and Water Column Observatory, a large-scale European environmental research infrastructureSilvia Peppoloni, Giuseppe Di Capua, Laura BeranzoliF1 Focus track on improving research systems: the role of fundersPaulo S.L. Beirão, Susan ZimmermanF2 Focus track on improving research systems: the role of countriesSabine Kleinert, Ana MarusicF3 Focus track on improving research systems: the role of institutionsMelissa S. Anderson, Lex Bouter. (shrink)

Strong evidence shows that exposure and engagement with the natural world not only improve human wellbeing but can also help promote environmentally friendly behaviors. Human-nature relationships are at the heart of global agendas promoted by international organizations including the World Health Organization’s “One Health” and the United Nations “Ocean Decade.” These agendas demand collaborative multisector interdisciplinary efforts at local, national, and global levels. However, while global agendas highlight global goals for a sustainable world, developing science that directly addresses these agendas (...) from design through to delivery and outputs does not come without its challenges. In this article, we present the outcomes of international meetings between researchers, stakeholders, and policymakers from the United Kingdom and Brazil. We propose a model for interdisciplinary work under such global agendas, particularly the interface between One Health and the UN Ocean Decade and identify three priority research areas closely linked to each other: human-nature connection, conservation-human behavior, and implementation strategies. We also discuss a number of recommendations for moving forward. (shrink)

Automatized scalable healthcare support solutions allow real-time 24/7 health monitoring of patients, prioritizing medical treatment according to health conditions, reducing medical appointments in clinics and hospitals, and enabling easy exchange of information among healthcare professionals. With recent health safety guidelines due to the COVID-19 pandemic, protecting the elderly has become imperative. However, state-of-the-art health wearable device platforms present limitations in hardware, parameter estimation algorithms, and software architecture. This paper proposes a complete framework for health systems composed of multi-sensor wearable health (...) devices, high-resolution parameter estimation, and real-time monitoring applications. The framework is appropriate for real-time monitoring of elderly patients' health without physical contact with healthcare professionals, maintaining safety standards. The hardware includes sensors for monitoring steps, pulse oximetry, heart rate, and temperature using low-power wireless communication. In terms of parameter estimation, the embedded circuit uses high-resolution signal processing algorithms that result in an improved measure of the HR. The proposed high-resolution signal processing-based approach outperforms state-of-the-art HR estimation measurements using the photoplethysmography sensor. (shrink)

We study the decidability of k-provability in \—the relation ‘being provable in \ with at most k steps’—and the decidability of the proof-skeleton problem—the problem of deciding if a given formula has a proof that has a given skeleton. The decidability of k-provability for the usual Hilbert-style formalisation of \ is still an open problem, but it is known that the proof-skeleton problem is undecidable for that theory. Using new methods, we present a characterisation of some numbers k for which (...) k-provability is decidable, and we present a characterisation of some proof-skeletons for which one can decide whether a formula has a proof whose skeleton is the considered one. These characterisations are natural and parameterised by unification algorithms. (shrink)

Kreisel’s conjecture is the statement: if, for all$n\in \mathbb {N}$,$\mathop {\text {PA}} \nolimits \vdash _{k \text { steps}} \varphi (\overline {n})$, then$\mathop {\text {PA}} \nolimits \vdash \forall x.\varphi (x)$. For a theory of arithmeticT, given a recursive functionh,$T \vdash _{\leq h} \varphi $holds if there is a proof of$\varphi $inTwhose code is at most$h(\#\varphi )$. This notion depends on the underlying coding.${P}^h_T(x)$is a predicate for$\vdash _{\leq h}$inT. It is shown that there exist a sentence$\varphi $and a total recursive functionhsuch that$T\vdash (...) _{\leq h}\mathop {\text {Pr}} \nolimits _T(\ulcorner \mathop {\text {Pr}} \nolimits _T(\ulcorner \varphi \urcorner )\rightarrow \varphi \urcorner )$, but, where$\mathop {\text {Pr}} \nolimits _T$stands for the standard provability predicate inT. This statement is related to a conjecture by Montagna. Also variants and weakenings of Kreisel’s conjecture are studied. By the use of reflexion principles, one can obtain a theory$T^h_\Gamma $that extendsTsuch that a version of Kreisel’s conjecture holds: given a recursive functionhand$\varphi (x)$a$\Gamma $-formula (where$\Gamma $is an arbitrarily fixed class of formulas) such that, for all$n\in \mathbb {N}$,$T\vdash _{\leq h} \varphi (\overline {n})$, then$T^h_\Gamma \vdash \forall x.\varphi (x)$. Derivability conditions are studied for a theory to satisfy the following implication: if, then$T\vdash \forall x.\varphi (x)$. This corresponds to an arithmetization of Kreisel’s conjecture. It is shown that, for certain theories, there exists a functionhsuch that$\vdash _{k \text { steps}}\ \subseteq\ \vdash _{\leq h}$. (shrink)