Sentence examples for conduct of scientists from inspiring English sources

This obligation and its implications for the conduct of scientists deserve greater attention in the life sciences literature.

The report entitled "Professional conduct of scientists during volcanic crises14" issued in 1999 by IAVCEI's Subcommittee for Crisis Protocols (Newhall et al. 1999, Newhall et al. 2000 Geist & Garcia 2000) is a rare,15 if not unique, example of an attempt to offer authoritative practice guidance based on past events16 and an extensive literature review.

Because scientists are often perceived as a freewheeling and cavalier community who are exempt from societal rules, many members of the public (many researchers, too...) think that the conduct of scientists can best be kept in check by the implementation of oaths.

Such studies are essential not only because they enable to establish guidelines for the conduct of scientists towards studied species and the management of tourism and recreational activities in natural habitats [ 26, 29- 34], but especially because of their implications on the way we think about scientific experiments in the wild, and the inferences we derive from those experiments [ 17].

► A Letter in this week's Science, from Brett Favaro of the Centre for Sustainable Aquatic Resources at the Fisheries and Marine Institute of Memorial University of Newfoundland in Canada, considered the issue of carbon emission by scientists in the course of their research and suggested adoption of a "carbon code of conduct" for scientists.

The new information is the first to emerge from an ongoing federal investigation into Gelsinger's death and raises fresh questions about the conduct of the scientists involved.

The University of East Anglia in Britain has named Sir Muir Russell, who has held various academic posts in Scotland, to lead an independent inquiry into allegations about the quality of research and data-keeping at the university's Climatic Research Unit and the conduct of some scientists there.

Others claim that the conduct of some scientists (and the mystique surrounding many more) has created a more cautious and concerned public.

That, in terms of access to information, is the main conclusion of the Independent Review of the conduct of the scientists involved in what became known as the "climategate" e-mails affair, which has been published today.

While the review strongly criticises the conduct of those scientists who refused to embrace a culture of openness, it is important to note that it also places much of the blame on the broader university administration.

Additionally, they would have to adopt a "code of conduct" for scientists working with dangerous germs, and enforce "strict biosafety procedures" for all germ research.