Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

7 RECOMMENDATIONS
Pages 145-155

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 145...
... ACTING TO DEFINE AND STRENGTHEN BASIC PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES Recommendation One Individual scientists and officials of research institutions should accept formal responsibility for ensuring the integrity of the research process. They should foster an environment, a reward system, and a training process that encourage responsible research practices.
From page 146...
... Fall-back provisions should provide necessary support, both emotional and material, to the trainee from the resources of the department or institution. Recommendation Two Scientists and research institutions should integrate into their curricula educational programs that foster faculty and student awareness of concerns related to the integrity of the research process.
From page 147...
... Guidelines should be actively discussed by all who are affected by them and modified as experience dictates. DEALING WITH MISCONDUCTINSTITUTIONAL ROLES Recommendation Four Research institutions and government agencies should adopt a common framework of definitions for distinguishing among misconduct in science, questionable research practices, and other forms of misconduct.
From page 148...
... The ambiguity of the scope of regulatory definitions provides opportunity for serious misunderstandings between individual scientists and research institutions and between institutions and government agencies. A federal interagency committee has been established by OSTP to establish model policies and procedures for government agencies to use in handling allegations of misconduct in science.
From page 149...
... But the methods used by individual scientists and research institutions to address questionable research practices should be distinct from those for handling misconduct in science or other misconduct. Recommendation Eight Research institutions should have policies and procedures to address other misconduct such as theft, harassment, or vandalism that may occur in the research environment.
From page 150...
... Efforts to standardize research practices across the disciplines or across institutions should be avoided, since they may weaken many of the strengths and positive features associated with the diversity that fosters intellectual freedom in the research environment. TAKING ADDITIONAL STEPS Recommendation Ten An independent Scientific Integrity Advisory Board should be created by the scientific community and research institutions to exercise leadership in addressing ethical issues in research conduct; in framing model policies and procedures to address misconduct in science and other misconduct; to collect and analyze data on episodes of misconduct in the research environment; to provide periodic assessments of the adequacy of public and priorate systems that have been developed to handle misconduct-in-science cases; and to facilitate the exchange of information about and experience with policies and procedures governing the handling of allegations of misconduct in science.
From page 151...
... In fulfilling its charge, SIAB would comment on selected features of misconduct-in-science policies and procedures adopted by research institutions and, upon request, provide a confidential evaluation of proposed policies to the subject institution. SIAB could also monitor the activities of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the Public Health Service, the National Science Foundation, and other agencies to review and comment publicly on agency policies and procedures for handling allegations of misconduct in sci ence.
From page 152...
... The Scientific Integrity Advisory Board could operate in the same manner as the Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government, founded in 1988 by the Carnegie Corporation of New York as a nongovernmental organization to assess the process by which the government incorporates scientific and technical knowledge into policy and decision making.) The commission includes former government officials, eminent scientists, and private sector leaders as well as an advisory council.
From page 153...
... Additional staff members might be needed in the course of SIAB's providing active services and programs to research institutions and the public. Termination The panel believes that SIAB has the potential to improve significantly both the performance of the scientific community in handling instances of misconduct and also the environment for sustaining integrity in research.
From page 154...
... When a prolonged investigation is expected, research managers may suggest a temporary reassignment of both the subject of the investigation and the complainant during the time of the inquiry and investigation to mitigate possible tensions. Research institutions and, in some cases, scientific societies may also offer to provide professional recommendations for persons who have been instrumental in disclosing misconduct if the proceedings prove time consuming.
From page 155...
... NOTE 1. For a discussion of the commission's origins, see Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government (1991)


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.