Adil E. Shamoo and David B. Resnik
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- May 2009
- ISBN:
- 9780195368246
- eISBN:
- 9780199867615
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195368246.003.0008
- Subject:
- Biology, Disease Ecology / Epidemiology, Biochemistry / Molecular Biology
Since the 1980s, well-publicized examples of research misconduct have increased public concerns and stimulated responses from government, universities, and other research institutions. The result has ...
More
Since the 1980s, well-publicized examples of research misconduct have increased public concerns and stimulated responses from government, universities, and other research institutions. The result has been the formulation of policies and procedures that are designed to investigate, adjudicate, and prevent misconduct in research. Surveys indicate that the prevalence of misconduct may be larger than many researchers would like to acknowledge. Some aspects of these deliberations are controversial and are still in progress. There is now a functioning system in place designed to deal with misconduct allegations, and efforts to prevent misconduct are increasing. This chapter discusses the definition of scientific misconduct as well as policies and procedures for reporting, investigating, and adjudicating misconduct.Less
Since the 1980s, well-publicized examples of research misconduct have increased public concerns and stimulated responses from government, universities, and other research institutions. The result has been the formulation of policies and procedures that are designed to investigate, adjudicate, and prevent misconduct in research. Surveys indicate that the prevalence of misconduct may be larger than many researchers would like to acknowledge. Some aspects of these deliberations are controversial and are still in progress. There is now a functioning system in place designed to deal with misconduct allegations, and efforts to prevent misconduct are increasing. This chapter discusses the definition of scientific misconduct as well as policies and procedures for reporting, investigating, and adjudicating misconduct.
Ann Nichols-Casebolt
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- May 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780195378108
- eISBN:
- 9780199932634
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195378108.003.0001
- Subject:
- Social Work, Research and Evaluation
This chapter defines and discusses what is meant by research integrity, particularly in the social sciences, its relationship to the responsible conduct of research (RCR), and why it is important. ...
More
This chapter defines and discusses what is meant by research integrity, particularly in the social sciences, its relationship to the responsible conduct of research (RCR), and why it is important. The domains essential to RCR are outlined along with a discussion of the role of professional ethics and federal regulations in guiding the conduct of research. The chapter presents a framework that can be used for ethical decision-making when confronted with dilemmas in a research setting. It concludes with suggested strategies for creating an organizational culture that supports research integrity.Less
This chapter defines and discusses what is meant by research integrity, particularly in the social sciences, its relationship to the responsible conduct of research (RCR), and why it is important. The domains essential to RCR are outlined along with a discussion of the role of professional ethics and federal regulations in guiding the conduct of research. The chapter presents a framework that can be used for ethical decision-making when confronted with dilemmas in a research setting. It concludes with suggested strategies for creating an organizational culture that supports research integrity.
Barbara K. Redman
- Published in print:
- 2013
- Published Online:
- May 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780262019811
- eISBN:
- 9780262317757
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- The MIT Press
- DOI:
- 10.7551/mitpress/9780262019811.001.0001
- Subject:
- Biology, Bioethics
Federal regulations that govern research misconduct in biomedicine have not prevented ongoing high-profile cases of fabrication, falsification or plagiarizing (FFP) in scientific research. Current ...
More
Federal regulations that govern research misconduct in biomedicine have not prevented ongoing high-profile cases of fabrication, falsification or plagiarizing (FFP) in scientific research. Current policy holds individual scientists or team members responsible for FFP. But a fair and effective policy must take into account the context in which this behavior is embedded -- in the pressure to publish positive findings in order to obtain tenure or grant money, or in institutions that may not be supportive of ethical practice but themselves carry no risk. This book analyzes a series of clinical research cases in which reported misconduct went undetected for a decade or more and finds laxity of oversight, little attention to harm done and inadequate correction of the scientific record. Goals of research misconduct policy must be to: protect scientific capital (knowledge, scientists, institutions, norms of science), support fair competition, contain harms to end users and the public trust, and enable science to meet its societal obligations. Reaching these goals will require a system-wide evolution of responsibility to promote and ensure scientific integrity.Less
Federal regulations that govern research misconduct in biomedicine have not prevented ongoing high-profile cases of fabrication, falsification or plagiarizing (FFP) in scientific research. Current policy holds individual scientists or team members responsible for FFP. But a fair and effective policy must take into account the context in which this behavior is embedded -- in the pressure to publish positive findings in order to obtain tenure or grant money, or in institutions that may not be supportive of ethical practice but themselves carry no risk. This book analyzes a series of clinical research cases in which reported misconduct went undetected for a decade or more and finds laxity of oversight, little attention to harm done and inadequate correction of the scientific record. Goals of research misconduct policy must be to: protect scientific capital (knowledge, scientists, institutions, norms of science), support fair competition, contain harms to end users and the public trust, and enable science to meet its societal obligations. Reaching these goals will require a system-wide evolution of responsibility to promote and ensure scientific integrity.
Curtis L. Meinert
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- September 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199742967
- eISBN:
- 9780199897278
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199742967.003.0010
- Subject:
- Public Health and Epidemiology, Epidemiology, Public Health
This chapter discusses research misconduct. Acts motivated by deceit, deception, or trickery constitute misconduct. The element of intent is evident in the definitions of fraud. Even acts of omission ...
More
This chapter discusses research misconduct. Acts motivated by deceit, deception, or trickery constitute misconduct. The element of intent is evident in the definitions of fraud. Even acts of omission can be fraudulent if intended to deceive. The usual punishment for persons found guilty of research misconduct is debarment, voluntary or imposed, to exclude them from receiving or participating in federally funded projects and from sitting on federal advisory panels. The debarment is usually for a specified period of time, typically three to five years in cases disposed of by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI).Less
This chapter discusses research misconduct. Acts motivated by deceit, deception, or trickery constitute misconduct. The element of intent is evident in the definitions of fraud. Even acts of omission can be fraudulent if intended to deceive. The usual punishment for persons found guilty of research misconduct is debarment, voluntary or imposed, to exclude them from receiving or participating in federally funded projects and from sitting on federal advisory panels. The debarment is usually for a specified period of time, typically three to five years in cases disposed of by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI).
