Index

A

Academic institutions.

See also Research enterprise;

Research institutions

cooperation between industry and, 76–77

data storage in, 50

ethics education by, 132–133

and faculty participation in investigations, 119–120

misconduct allegations in, 9–10, 91–93, 98–99.

See also Misconduct allegations policies and procedures instituted by, 43–44, 73, 77, 101, 104, 134

research traditions in, 67–68

and role of government agencies in handling misconduct allegations 112–115

scientists employed by, 71

Acadia Institute Survey, 91–93

Accountability

balance of intellectual freedom and, 11–12, 123

panel conclusions regarding, 123–124

in research enterprise, 74

of scientists, 2

Adjudication

discussion of, 107

responsibility for, 111

Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 85

Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration (ADAMHA)

biomedical training programs funded by, 129

misconduct-in-science regulations applicable to research sponsored by, 85

ALERT system (PHS), 110-111

Allegations.

See Misconduct allegations

American Association for the Advancement of Science, 99

American Chemical Society, 55

Association of American Medical Colleges, 99



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 191
RESPONSIBLE SCIENCE: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process Index A Academic institutions. See also Research enterprise; Research institutions cooperation between industry and, 76–77 data storage in, 50 ethics education by, 132–133 and faculty participation in investigations, 119–120 misconduct allegations in, 9–10, 91–93, 98–99. See also Misconduct allegations policies and procedures instituted by, 43–44, 73, 77, 101, 104, 134 research traditions in, 67–68 and role of government agencies in handling misconduct allegations 112–115 scientists employed by, 71 Acadia Institute Survey, 91–93 Accountability balance of intellectual freedom and, 11–12, 123 panel conclusions regarding, 123–124 in research enterprise, 74 of scientists, 2 Adjudication discussion of, 107 responsibility for, 111 Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, 85 Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration (ADAMHA) biomedical training programs funded by, 129 misconduct-in-science regulations applicable to research sponsored by, 85 ALERT system (PHS), 110-111 Allegations. See Misconduct allegations American Association for the Advancement of Science, 99 American Chemical Society, 55 Association of American Medical Colleges, 99

OCR for page 191
RESPONSIBLE SCIENCE: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process Association of American Universities, 99 Australia, 88 Authors honorary, 52–53 number per article, 54, 71 order of, 53 Authorship inappropriate, 86–87 plagiarism and issues of, 54–55 recognition of contributions, 53–54 requirements of, 52, 140 specialized, 53 B Bias appropriate and inappropriate sources of, 46 in peer review situations, 141 Biomedical training programs, 129 Bush report, 68 C Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government, 152 Causes of misconduct, 30–31 Centers for Disease Control, 85 Clinical research academic–industry collaboration in, 76–77 unique nature of, 31 Code of ethics. See also Ethics adopted by individual disciplines, 39, 42 unwritten, 36–37 Collaborative research, 72 Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (COSEPUP), 3, 22 Communication/publication issues authorship and, 52–55 editors and, 55–56 overview of, 51–52 peer review and, 56 Computer technology. See Information technology Confidentiality, 107 Council of Graduate Schools (CGS), 91, 92 Courts, role in misconduct allegations and investigations, 115–116 D Data. See Research data Definitions, 5–7, 27–30 Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), 84, 85, 108 regulations and procedures regarding misconduct allegations, 87–88, 99, 108–111 Disciplinary measures, 103–104 Disciplines, role of, 41–42 Disclosure, 78–79 Doctorates increase in number of, 71 variations in length of training for, 61 Due process requirements Constitutional requirements, 116–117 differences in university and government approach to, 113–114 elements of, 117–118 resolving misconduct cases and, 116–118 E Edsall, John T., 131 Educational programs to foster responsible research practices, 129 incorporation of ethics into, 130–133 panel recommendations regarding, 13, 146–147 Engineers, 71 Error correction, 18, 56–59

OCR for page 191
RESPONSIBLE SCIENCE: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process Ethics. See also Code of ethics approaches to teaching, 131–133 benefits of teaching, 130–131 Evidentiary standards, 113 F Fabrication, 5, 27 False accusations, 121. See also Whistle-blowers False Claims Act, 84 Falsification, 5, 27 Federal research funds increases in, 16, 33, 68, 71 standards for recipients of, 85 Feynman, Richard, 37 Food and Drug Administration (FDA), 85 Foreign students, 61 Fraud first public examination of, 98 legal definition of, 25, 34 legislative requirement, 99 Freedom of Information Act, 151 G Germany, 88 Gift authorship, 52–53 Gore, Albert, 98 Government agencies. See also individual agencies handling of misconduct allegations by, 112–115 panel recommendations for, 14–15, 147–150 policies and procedures to handle misconduct allegations, 9–10, 20, 100–101, 108–112 regulations of, 44–45, 49, 98–101 sanctions imposed by, 118–119 statistics on misconduct provided by, 20, 81–84 Great Britain, 88 Guidelines for conduct of research. See Research conduct guidelines H Harassment handling allegations of, 29 as other misconduct, 86 panel recommendations regarding, 15, 149 Harvard Medical School, 55, 135 Health Research Extension Act of 1985 (P.L. 100–504), 108 Honor in Science (Sigma Xi), 54, 131, 134, 137 Honorary authors, 52–53 Huth, E., 71 Hypotheses explanation of, 38 formulation and testing of, 58 I India, 88 Industry cooperation between academic institutions and, 76–77 role in interdisciplinary research, 73 Information technology, 51 Inquiries. See Misconduct inquiries Inspector General Act Amendments of 1988, 111 Institutions. See Academic institutions; Research institutions Integrity of research process definition of, 4, 17, 24–25 methods of ensuring, 20–22 panel recommendations regarding, 13, 145–147 safeguards to, 18 Integrity of science, 25 Intellectual freedom balance of accountability and, 11–12, 123 panel conclusions regarding, 123–124 Intellectual property rights disputes over, 19

OCR for page 191
RESPONSIBLE SCIENCE: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process journal submission dates and, 52 National Science Foundation policy regarding, 44 policies of academic institutions regarding, 73, 77 Intent to deceive, 26 Interdisciplinary research organization of, 73 training workshops dealing with responsible research practices in 133 International studies of misconduct in science, 88 Investigations. See Misconduct investigations J Johns Hopkins University Medical School, 135 Journals. See Scientific journals L Laboratories. See Research laboratories Legislation, 21, 84, 99, 111, 151 M Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 68 Materials transfer agreements, 49 Mentorship explanation of, 59 negative aspects of, 60–62, 146 positive aspects of, 59–60 responsible research practices and, 141–142 selection of trainees and, 62 Merton, Robert, 41 Misconduct allegations accountability and intellectual freedom issues and, 11–12 consequences of inquiries and investigations due to, 118–119 due process requirements and, 116–118 experiences of institutional officials with, 87–88 findings, discussion, and conclusions regarding, 104–107 issues related to reporting of, 81, 91, 120–121. See also Whistle-blowers panel findings and conclusions regarding, 9–12, 95, 105, 107, 111, 121–125 procedural elements to handle, 10–11, 98–104, 148–149 role of courts in, 115–116 special issues in university investigations regarding, 119–120 university–government approaches to handle, 9–10, 98–107 unresolved issues in approaches to handling, 112–115 Misconduct in science, 2, 4, 80 and access to primary data, 49–50 analyses, surveys, and other reports of, 88–95 causes and cures for, 30–31 consequences of confirmed, 84–85 definitions of, 5, 25–28, 112–113, 147–148 demarcation between questionable research practices and, 29 government statistics on, 81–84 incidence of, 2, 9,19–20, 80–95 international studies regarding, 88 panel recommendations regarding, 147–150 problems for those who report. See also Whistle-blowers reasons for taking action regarding, 31–33 reports from local institutional officials regarding, 87–88 sources of detection for, 90–92 underreporting, possibility of,9, 20, 81, 95

OCR for page 191
RESPONSIBLE SCIENCE: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process variations in definitions of, 85–87, 112–113, 124, 148 Misconduct inquiries consequences of, 118–119 explanation of, 100 procedures for, 102 Misconduct investigations access of scientists to reports of, 87 as distinguished from adjudication, 107 consequences of, 118–119 explanation of, 100 faculty participation in, 119–120 leaking of draft reports of, 114 procedure for, 102–104 quality and timeliness of, 114–115 Misconduct (other) associated with misconduct in science, 29–30 definition of, 6–7, 26, 29, 86 panel recommendations regarding, 18, 149 Mulkay, Michael, 41 N National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA), 152 National Academy of Sciences (NAS), 152 National Institutes of Health (NIH) awards supported annually by, 20 biomedical training programs funded by, 129 guidelines for conduct of research, 135 misconduct-in-science regulations applicable to, 85 National Library of Medicine, 55 National Science Foundation (NSF) data-sharing policy of, 44–45 definitions used by, 27, 86 regulations and procedures to address misconduct allegations, 21, 88, 100, 108, 111–112 review of misconduct allegations by, 82–83, 103 sanctions imposed by, 119 New England Journal of Medicine , 55–56 Noncontributing authors, 52–53 Norms of science, 40–41 O Office of Inspector General (OIG) (DHHS) activities of, 108–110 also NSF OIG, 82, 101, 111–112 report on incidence of misconduct, 94 report on institutional policies and procedures for addressing misconduct 99 role in handling misconduct allegations, 82–83 3, 110 Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), 147–148 Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI) (DHHS), 84, 90 procedures regarding leaks, 114 regulations and procedures to address misconduct allegations, 108, 109 Office of Scientific Integrity Review (OSIR) (DHHS) description of investigatory process by, 103 first annual report of, 86 misconduct cases studied by, 84, 85, 90–91 regulations and procedures to address misconduct allegations, 109 requirements for recipients of Public Health Service research awards 100 sanctions imposed by, 119 On Being a Scientist (National Academy of Sciences), 131, 134, 137

OCR for page 191
RESPONSIBLE SCIENCE: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process P Panel on Scientific Responsibility and the Conduct of Research approach, scope, and audience addressed by, 4, 22–23 charge of, 3, 22 definitions of terms used by, 4–7, 24–30 findings and conclusions of regarding changing research enterprise, 8–9, 77–79 regarding handling of allegations of misconduct, 9–12, 95, 105, 107, 121–125 regarding incidence and significance of misconduct, 9, 95 regarding need for independent organization to strengthen processes and procedures, 124–125 regarding PHS ALERT system, 111 regarding responsible research practices 12–13, 62–64, 137–138, 143 regarding scientists and research institutions, 7–8, 149 recommendations of, 13–16, 145–155 Patents increases in issuance of, 71 profitability associated with, 48 Peer review discussion of, 56 effects of increased volume of research on, 71–72 identification of misconduct by, 91 misuse of privileged information gained through, 54–55 to penalize competitors, 27 responsible research practices and, 140–141 Plagiarism confirmed misconduct charges due to, 82 definition of, 5, 27 discussion of, 54–55 Postdoctoral positions growth rate in, 71 period of training for, 61 Privileged information, 54–55 Professional societies. See Scientific societies Public Health Service (PHS) maintenance of ALERT system by, 110–111 misconduct allegations under review by, 84, 103 regulations to address misconduct allegations, 21, 85–86, 99 regulatory definitions used by, 27 requirements for recipients of research awards from, 100, 129, 148 sanctions imposed by, 119 Publication. See also Authorship; Communication/publication issues; Scientific journals concerns regarding practices of, 52 overemphasis on, 75–76 responsible research practices and, 139–140 Q Questionable research practices, 4. See also Research practices definition of, 5–6, 28–29 demarcation between misconduct in science and, 29 discouragement of, 142–143 inappropriate authorship as, 86–87 investigated as alleged misconduct in science, 87 R Regulatory policies for academic institutions, 73 accountability and, 74 regarding reports of fraud, 21

OCR for page 191
RESPONSIBLE SCIENCE: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process Remedial actions, 119 Replication of research, 59 Research conduct guidelines benefits of, 136 disadvantages of, 136–137 panel conclusions regarding, 137–138 panel recommendations regarding, 13, 147 scope and purpose of, 135–136 Research data acquisition and management of, 47–49, 138–139 and advances in information technology, 51 selective use of, 29 storage of, 49–50 Research data sharing discussion of, 48–49 government reliance on, 45 National Science Foundation policy on, 44–45 Research directors, 43, 70 Research enterprise changing circumstances and expectations in, 18–19, 69–70, 77 complexity of collaboration in, 72 factors suggesting possible causes of misconduct in, 30–31 historical perspective of, 67–69 organization, goals, and management of groups within, 72–74 panel findings and conclusions regarding, 8–9, 77–79 panel recommendations to strengthen, 13–16, 145–155 regulation and accountability in, 74 reward system in, 74–76 size and scope of contemporary, 71–72 traditions of science in, 17–18 university–industrial cooperation in, 76–77 Research environment factors contributing to change, 18, 69–70 See also Research enterprise Research ethics. See Ethics Research funds. See also Federal research funds increases in, 16, 18, 33, 68, 71 misconduct allegations regarding, 29, 92–93 Research groups dynamics of, 42–43 management of, 72–74 role of research trainee in, 60 size, specialization, and diversity within, 19, 61, 70, 78 Research institutions. See alsoAcademic institutions; Research enterprise benefits of information technology advances to, 51 challenges to, 2–3 educational programs sponsored by, 129 encouragement of responsible research practices by, 128–129 misconduct allegations handled by, 9–11, 20, 98–104. See alsoMisconduct allegations panel findings and conclusions regarding, 7–8, 63, 78 panel recommendations for, 13–15, 147–150 research guidelines developed by, 39–40, 43–44 role in fostering responsible research practices of, 129–130, 134–135 social expectations regarding accountability of, 2, 21 Research laboratories role of research trainee in, 60 storage of data in, 49–50 Research practices. See alsoQuestionable research practices; Responsible research practices code of ethics guiding, 36–37, 42

OCR for page 191
RESPONSIBLE SCIENCE: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process communication and publication and, 51–56 data handling and, 47–51 error correction and, 18, 56–59 government regulations and policies affecting, 44–45 guidelines for conduct of. See Research conduct guidelines individual scientific disciplines affecting, 41–42 institutional policies affecting, 43–44 panel findings and conclusions regarding, 12–13, 62–64 panel recommendations regarding, 13–15, 145–147 during periods of new conceptual insights, 39 role of individual scientists and groups in, 42–43 scientific norms affecting, 40–41, 48 social attitudes and expectations affecting, 45–46 training and mentorship and, 59–62 Research process integrity of. See Integrity of research process replication and reconfirmation of results as element of, 38, 59 steps in, 17–18 Research proposals, 71 Research trainees. See alsoMentorship; Training programs in large research laboratories, 61 relationship between mentors and, 59–60 responsible research practices and, 141–142 selection of mentors by, 62 Responsible research practices. See also Research practices ethics education of scientists as method to encourage, 130–133 guidelines for. See Research conduct guidelines institutional efforts to encourage, 128–129 panel findings and conclusions regarding, 12–13, 62–64, 137–138, 143 panel recommendations for, 13–16, 145–155 subjects to consider to encourage, 138–142 Reward system, 74–76 S Sapp, Jan, 39 Science. See also Misconduct in science general norms of, 40–41, 48 integrity of, 25 nature of, 38–39 traditions of, 17–18 Scientific disciplines guiding principles of specific, 36 research practices in various, 37, 39, 41–42 Scientific evidence operation of judgment in selecting, 39 principles of acceptable, 37 Scientific Freedom and Responsibility (Edsall), 131 Scientific Integrity Advisory Board (SIAB), 15, 124–125, 152–156 organization and structure of, 152–153 panel comments regarding, 153–154 panel recommendation for, 15, 150 specific tasks of, 150–151 termination of, 153 Scientific journals authorship guidelines for, 52, 55–56. See also Authorship data storage issues and, 49–50 editors of, 55–56 number of articles published in, 71 panel recommendations for, 16, 155 proliferation of, 71

OCR for page 191
RESPONSIBLE SCIENCE: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process Scientific method, 36, 38 Scientific reports correction of errors, 56–57 detection of errors in, 18, 57–58 Scientific societies ethics publications of, 131 panel recommendations for, 16, 155 standards-setting activities of, 42 Scientific theories, 38 Scientists academic rank and misconduct of, 90, 91 basic principles guiding, 36–37, 42–43 challenges to, 2–3 concerns regarding definition of misconduct in science, 26 concerns regarding reports of misconduct, 20 deviant behavior by, 93–94 integration of ethics into education of, 130–133 norms for, 40–41 panel findings and conclusions regarding, 7–8 panel recommendations for, 13–16, 149, 154–155 replication and reconfirmation of results as responsibility of, 59 social expectations regarding accountability of, 2, 21 Self–regulatory system evolution of, 62 need for modifications of, 63 questions raised regarding, 18, 20 Sexist behavior, 61 Sharing Research Data (National Research Council), 48 Sigma Xi material on ethics published by, 131 misconduct study by, 94 Social attitudes, 40–41 Specialized authorship, 53 Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations (House Science and Technology Committee), 98 Supreme Court, U.S., 117 T Technology transfer programs, 76 Trainees. See Mentorship; Research trainees Training programs. See alsoMentorship; Research trainees panel recommendations regarding, 13, 146 programs to foster responsible research practices in, 129, 133 Truthfulness, 17 U Underreporting, possibility of, 9, 20, 81, 95 Universities. See Academic institutions University of Maryland, 134 University of Michigan Medical School, 135 V Vandalism, 149 W Whistle-blower Protection Act of 1989, 123 Whistle-blowers false accusations by, 121 panel's recommendation on, 16, 156–157 professional and economic deterrents for, 81, 91 protections for, 122–123 role of, 120–121 Woolf, Patricia, 89–90 Z Ziman, John, 41