Misconduct in research
The term research misconduct usually
refers to fabricating, falsifying, plagiarizing or stealing scientific
data and results, that is, cheating in various ways. During recent
years, many cases exemplifying such behavior have undergone review
in the media.
As the state and its citizens, as well as commercial interests, require dependable scientific results, while it is also important that the public retain its trust in research, it is a self-evident fact that every researcher should strive after honest conduct.
Definitions
It is important to note that most definitions of research misconduct refer to actions where a researcher intentionally and in a deceptive way departs from good practice. A detailed and often-used definition is provided by the United States Government:
Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.
Fabrication is making up results and recording or reporting them.
Falsification is manipulating research, materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.
Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit, including those obtained through confidential review of others’ research proposals and manuscripts.
Research misconduct does not include honest error or honest differences of opinions.
In some countries, they think it is best to leave questions of intentionality aside, with the motivation that one should not anticipate the examination made in a criminal case or regarding disciplinary consequences.
International guidelines
Internationally, the European Science Foundation has published several policy briefings on the subject: Good Scientific Practice in Research and Scholarship (policy briefing no 10), and Research Integrity: global responsibility to foster common standards (Policy Briefing no 30), as well as the report Stewards of Integrity – Institutional Approaches to Promote and Safeguard Good Research Practice in Europe. OECD has issued Best Practices for Ensuring Scientific Integrity and Preventing Misconduct.
The peer-review system
To ensure quality in research, review is conducted at many levels: First by the granting authority and often also by a research ethics committee, then by editors and independent peer reviewers upon publication of the results, and finally by other researchers who read the published material. None of this, however, removes any of the researcher's primary responsibility.
Research material should be archived so that it is possible to go back later and test or replicate the research conducted. See pages on publication of research results, as well as storage and ownership of research results.
Whistleblowers
Reporting suspected fraud in research is not entirely uncomplicated. "Whistleblowers" have occasionally experienced negative reactions to their reports. Particular support for these people can be necessary, a concept that is stressed in documents such as the Uppsala Codex. Guidelines for when it is defendable to blow the whistle on unethical practice in one's own organisation has been suggested in the Code of professional, social and ethical responsibility for professional and managerial staff, by Union Network International, UNI.
In international research collaborations, differences within and between national policies might create challenges. To handle those, OECD has issued the guideline "Investigating Research Misconduct Allegations in International Collaborative Research Projects".
Last updated: 2010-01-03