Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Research wrongdoing undermines scientific integrity, occurs widely, and takes many forms. We interviewed 135 NIH principal investigators who reported witnessing and responding to research wrongdoing. They reported taking a variety of actions, including formal notification of institutional officials, peer shaming, and one-on-one discussions with their peers to address wrongdoing that ranged from improper attribution of authorship to falsification, fabrication, and plagiarism. Unexpectedly, administrative mismanagement in handling allegations appeared more prevalent than any of the other forms of wrongdoing reported. Institutions may lack effective or efficient processes for managing even the most egregious cases of research wrongdoing. To assist institutions in designing effective, nimble programs, we suggest resources from which institutional officials may draw.

Keywords

research misconduct research misbehavior research wrongdoing research integrity whistle-blowing

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Altman

(1997). Scientific and research misconduct. In Altman

& Hernon

(Eds.), Research misconduct: Issues, implications and strategies. Greenwich, CT: Ablex Publishing.

Bird

& Hoffman-Kim

(1998). Damned if you do, damned if you don't: The scientific community's responses to whistle blowing. Science and Engineering Ethics, 4(1), 3–6.

Chang

(2002). Panel says Bell scientist faked discoveries in physics. New York Times, September 26, p. A1.

Chong

& Normile

(2006). How young Korean researchers helped unearth a scandal. Science, 311(5757), 22–25.

Deutch

& Coleman

P. T.

(2000). The handbook of conflict resolution: Theory and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Devries

Anderson

, & Martinson

(2006). Normal misbehavior: Scientists talk about the ethics of research. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 1(1), 43–50.

Glazer

M. P.

& Glazer

P. M.

(1989). The whistle-blowers. New York: Basic Books.

Gunsalus

C. K.

(1998). Preventing the need for whistle-blowing: Practical advice for university administrators. Science and Engineering Ethics, 4(1), 75–94.

Gunsalus

C. K.

(2006). The college administrator's survival guide. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

10.

Keith-Spiegel

& Koocher

(2010). Peers nip misconduct in the bud. Nature, 466, 438–440.

11.

Kintisch

(2005). Researcher faces prison for fraud in NIH grant applications and papers. Science, 307(5717), 1851.

12.

Sparrow

(2000). The regulatory craft: Controlling risks, solving problems, and managing compliance. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

13.

Sparrow

(2008). The character of harms: Operational challenges in control. New York: Cambridge University Press.

14.

Titus

Wells

, & Rhoades

(2008). Repairing research integrity. Nature, 453, 980–982.

15.

Wade

(2002). A new look at old data may discredit a theory on race. New York Times, October 8, p. F3.

Witnesses to Research Wrongdoing

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References