Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 181–187 | Cite as

On (scientific) integrity: conceptual clarification

  • Maria do Céu Patrão Neves
Scientific Contribution


The notion of “integrity” is currently quite common and broadly recognized as complex, mostly due to its recurring and diverse application in various distinct domains such as the physical, psychic or moral, the personal or professional, that of the human being or of the totality of beings. Nevertheless, its adjectivation imprints a specific meaning, as happens in the case of “scientific integrity”. This concept has been defined mostly by via negativa, by pointing out what goes against integrity, that is, through the identification of its infringements, which has also not facilitated the elaboration of an overarching and consensual code of scientific integrity. In this context, it is deemed necessary to clarify the notion of “integrity”, first etymologically, recovering the original meaning of the term, and then in a specifically conceptual way, through the identification of the various meanings with which the term can be legitimately used, particularly in the domain of scientific research and innovation. These two steps are fundamental and indispensable for a forthcoming attempt at systematizing the requirements of “scientific integrity”.


Integrity Bioethics Scientific research Virtues Duties Scientific integrity 



This paper was produced as a base for discussion of the Declaration of scientific integrity on responsible research and innovation, presented by the UNESCO Chairs in Bioethics of the Catholic University of Portugal (UCP) and the University of Barcelona, in October 2016, authored by Maria Casado, M. Patrão Neves, Itziar Lecuona, Ana Sofia Carvalho, Joana Araújo, to whom I thank for the inputs.


  1. BIOMED II Project. 1998. The Barcelona Declaration on policy proposals to the European commission on basic ethical principles in bioethics and biolaw.
  2. Council of Europe. 1997. Convention for the protection of human rights and dignity of the human being with regard to the application of biology and medicine: convention on human rights and biomedicine.
  3. Cox, Damian, Marguerite La Caze, and Michael Levine. 2017. “Integrity”, Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy.
  4. Dudzinski, Denise M. 2004. “Integrity: Principled coherence, virtue, or both?” Journal of Value Inquiry 38: 299–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Global Research Council. 2013. Statement on principles on research integrity.
  6. Hermeren, Göran. 2001. “Intégrité”. In Nouvelle encyclopédie de bioéthique: medicine, environnement, biotechnologie, eds. Gilbert Hottois, and Jean-Noël Missa, 542–544. Bruxelles: De Boeck Université.Google Scholar
  7. Kemp, Peter. 1998. “L’Intégrité”. In Studies in ethics and law: From ethics to biolaw, vol. 7. Copenhagen: Rhodos.Google Scholar
  8. Latin - Online Etymology Dictionary.
  9. Montreal Statement on Research Integrity in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations. 2013.
  10. Rendtorff, J.D., and P. Kemp. 2000. Basic ethical principles in European bioethics and biolaw, vol. I. Autonomy, dignity, integrity and vulnerability, 393–399. Copenhagen: Centre for Ethics and Law.Google Scholar
  11. Singapore Statement on Research Integrity. 2010.
  12. UNESCO. 1997. Universal declaration on human genome and human rights.
  13. UNESCO. 2003. International declaration on human genetic data.
  14. UNESCO. 2005. Universal declaration on bioethics and human rights.
  15. Valpy, Francis Edward Jackson. 2005. Etymological dictionary of the Latin language. Boston: Adamant Media Corporation.Google Scholar
  16. Van der Heyden, M.A.G., T. Van de Ven, and T. Opthof. 2009. Fraud and misconduct in science: The stem cell seduction. Netherland Heart Journal 17 (1): 25–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. World Medical Association/WHO. 1975. Helsinki Declaration.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universidade dos AçoresPonta Delgada – AçoresPortugal

Personalised recommendations