National Research Council. "Executive Summary." Integrity in Scientific Research: Creating an Environment That Promotes Responsible Conduct. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2002. 1. Print.
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
Integrity in Scientific Research: Creating an Environment that Promotes Responsible Conduct
als in the popular press. The committee invited experts to make public presentations, commissioned background papers, and sought additional technical assistance from knowledgeable individuals.
OVERARCHING CONCLUSIONS
Several overarching conclusions emerged as the committee addressed DHHS’s need to develop means for assessing and tracking the state of integrity in the research environment:
Attention to issues of integrity in scientific research is very important to the public, scientists, the institutions in which they work, and the scientific enterprise itself.
No established measures for assessing integrity in the research environment exist.
Promulgation of and adherence to policies and procedures are necessary, but they are not sufficient means to ensure the responsible conduct of research.
There is a lack of evidence to definitively support any one way to approach the problem of promoting and evaluating research integrity.
Education in the responsible conduct of research is critical, but if not done appropriately and in a creative way, then education is likely to be of only modest help and may be ineffective.
Institutional self-assessment is one promising approach to assessing and continually improving integrity in research.
The committee found that existing data are insufficient to enable it to draw definitive conclusions as to which elements of the research environment promote integrity. The elements discussed in the report appear to be associated with integrity in research, but the specific contribution of each element remains poorly defined. Empirical studies evaluating the ethical climate before and after implementation of specific policies or practices are lacking.
Because of the limited empirical data on factors influencing responsible conduct in the scientific environment, the committee drew on more general theory (e.g., theories of organizational behavior, ethical decision making, and adult learning) to formulate the suggestions presented in the report. The findings and conclusions are based on the committee’s collective knowledge and experience after its review of the literature in the science and business arenas as well as its discussions with experts who presented talks at the committee’s open meetings.
