Responsible Science Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process: Volume II (1993) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
13 Guidelines on Research Data and Manuscripts
13 Guidelines on Research Data and Manuscripts
Pages 229-242
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 229... ...
Part D Policies and Procedures for Handling Allegations of Misconduct in Science
|
From page 231... ...
National Conference of Lawyers and Scientists, the AN U ACE, NASULGC Joint Committee on Health Policy, the AAV Executive Committee, and the AAU Biomedical Research Committee.
|
From page 232... ...
guidelines, "Policies and Procedures for Dealing wig Possible Misconduct in Science," and the 1987 regulations issued by the National Science Foundation (NSF) , "Misconduct in Science and Engineering Research." The PHS guidelines and NSF regulations v describe those agencies' preferred procedures for the institutional handling of allegations of research fraud.
|
From page 233... ...
· After resolving allegations, institutions should discharge their individuals and responsibilities both internally to all involved externally- to the public, the sponsors of research, the scientific literature, and the scientific community, to the extent that is appropriate and allowable. DEFINITION OF RESEARCH FRAUD Research fraud is a form of scientific misconduct involving deception.
|
From page 234... ...
fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, deception, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research; or (2) material failure to comply with federal requirements that uniquely relate to the conduct of research.
|
From page 235... ...
If an institution has separate policies and procedures for dealing with forms of misconduct other than fraud, it is suggested that the relevant sections be included in an appendix to the policies and procedures designed to address fraudulent behavior. PROCESS FOR HANDLING ALLEGATIONS OF RESEARCH FRAUD Initiation of an Inquiry The responsibility to pursue an allegation of research fraud belongs to the institution and must be carried out fully to resolve questions regarding the integrity of the research.
|
From page 236... ...
Regardless of the nature of the concern, Me senior administrator should seek to assist in its resolution Trough whatever institutional processes may be appropriate to the particular case, such as referral to the department chairman, the personnel office, or the faculty grievance procedure. If the senior administrator determines that the concern is properly addressed through policies and procedures designed to deal with fraud in research, the inquiry and investigation procedures should be discussed with the individual who has questions about Me integrity of a research project.
|
From page 237... ...
Purpose Whenever an allegation or complaint involving the possibility of fraud is made, the designated senior administrator should initiate an inquiry-the first step of the review process. In the inquiry stage, factual information is gathered and expeditiously reviewed to determine if an investigation of the charge is warranted.
|
From page 238... ...
It is recommended that the inquiry phase be completed within 30 days of the initial written notification of the respondent. A 30-day period is consistent with the 1986 PHS guidelines and the 1987 NSF regulations.
|
From page 239... ...
Whether a standing committee or an ad hoc committee is utilized, it is important that the committee have appropriate scientific expertise to assure a sound knowledge base from which to work. Process Upon receipt of inquiry findings that an investigation is warranted, the senior administrator-should initiate investigation promptly, and the complainant and respondent should be notified of the investigation.
|
From page 240... ...
An institution's policy should require that an investigation be conducted as expeditiously as possible. The adoption of a specified time period of 120 days for the completion of an investigation is recommended, to reflect the seriousness with which an institution views accusations of fraud and to be in compliance with the PHS guidelines and NSF regulations.
|
From page 241... ...
Appeal and Final Review Institutions may chose to provide respondents with an additional appeals process at this point through a written appeal of the investigative committee's decision. Appeals should be restricted to the body of evidence already presented, and the grounds for appeal should be limited to failure to follow appropriate procedures in the investigation or arbitrary and capricious decision making.
|
From page 242... ...
Consideration also should be given to formal notification of other concerned parties not previously notified, such as: Sponsoring agencies, funding sources; Coauthors, co-investigators, collaborators; Editors of journals in which fraudulent research was published; · State professional licensing boards; · Editors of journals or other publications, other institutions, sponsoring agencies, and funding sources with which the individual has been affiliated; Professional societies; Where appropriate, criminal authorities.
|
Key Terms
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.