Indeed, Lomborg’s case would seem to support the accusatorial model of ethics review, which assumes that scientists adequately regulate their own affairs through normal peer-review procedures. Here, scientific integrity is understood not as a duty to stakeholders—funders, companies, or, as with Hwang, politicians concerned about national prestige—but as a collective responsibility that is upheld by identifying and correcting errors before they cause substantial harm.
确实，隆姆博格案似乎支持了伦理审查的问责模式，该模式假定科学家通过正规的同行审查程序充分规范其自身事务。这样，科学诚信不是理解为对利益相关者（供资者、公司，或在黄案中为国家的名望声威担忧的政客）的责任，而是一种集体负责制，通过识别错误和在造成重大伤害之前纠正错误来予以维持。