科技管理學刊學術倫理爭議事件

An Academic Ethics Issue in the Journal of Technology Management

劉任昌(Jen-Chang Liu) ； 葉馬可(Mark Yeats)

《科學與人文研究》 8卷3期 (2021/05) Pp. 1-16

https://doi.org/10.6535/JSH.202105_8(3).0001

摘要

本研究旨在釐清一起學術倫理爭議事件，希冀檢舉人滿意於本文對爭議點的釐清，也期待被檢舉人公然承認或默認本文的釐清與批判。其次，本研究示範公然、負責的學術批判，以代替缺乏勇氣、逃避責任的匿名檢舉行為，重點在於：學術著作檢舉人必然是該領域的終極專才，才具有批判學術著作瑕疵、推翻審查人權威的專業性，所以，檢舉人更該受到學術同儕的反檢視，才具有挑戰已刊登論文的正當性。當前學術圈的惡習是匿名、連番的向學術單位、政府單位檢舉，導致被檢舉人所屬機構必須連番召開調查委員會、耗費精力與資源處理檢舉案。本研究終極目的是強化學術巨人的肩膀，各方得以站在巨人肩膀上，持續貢獻於發展學術智識、提升學術人格高度。本文評論的著作被指控「抄襲」，事實是中文表達的研究結果在2016年刊登在《科技管理學刊》，邀請國際知名學者加入合作、重新詮釋、再以英文表達刊登於2018年、影響係數超過2.5的Sustainability期刊，爭議點是後作沒有引用前作。這是隱匿資訊、對期刊與讀者不敬、違背學術精神的行為，卻也是臺灣學者習以為常的慣例；本研究呈現相關案例，提供相關機構參考，再基於比例原則，斟酌適當的處置措施。

關鍵字

匿名檢舉 ； 學術倫理 ； 學術誠信 ； 自我抄襲

並列摘要

This research aims to clarify an academic ethics controversy. It is hoped that the anonymous informant will be satisfied with the clarification of this controversy provided in this research. Furthermore, it is expected that the accused will openly acknowledge or acquiesce in the criticism of this research. Secondly, this research demonstrates open and responsible academic criticism, instead of making anonymous accusations that belie any pretense of courage and responsibility. The key point is that anyone that criticizes an academic work's flaws and tries to diminish the authority of published academic papers is usually required to be a professional with recognized standing in the field concerned. An academic whistleblower should be counter-examined by peers in the academic circle so as to provide some legitimacy to his or her accusation. A current trend in the academic circle is to report anonymously and repeatedly to academic and government units. As a result, the institution to which the accused person belongs must convene an investigating committee each time, which needlessly consumes energy and resources. The ultimate goal of this research is to clarify the related issues surrounding the accused works so as to strengthen the position of academics, providing support to scholars, enabling them to move on to contribute to the development of academic knowledge. The controversial work discussed in this paper was subject to accusations of ＂plagiarism.＂ The fact is that one of the accused works was written in Chinese and published in the Journal of Technology Management in 2016. Later, an internationally renowned scholar was invited to join the collaboration, to reinterpret it, and then to publish it in English in Sustainability, a journal with an SSCI impact factor coefficient of more than 2.5. The issue is that the later works did not quote the previous ones. This is an act of concealing information, disrespectful to both journals and their readership, and contrary to the academic spirit. Unfortunately, this is a common practice of Taiwanese scholars. This study will present relevant cases. Hopefully, the institute of the accused authors will consider appropriate measures, based on the principle of proportionality.

並列關鍵字

anonymous accusation ； self-plagiarism ； academic ethics ； academic integrity