Collective Openness and Other Recommendations for the Promotion of Research Integrity
- 210 Downloads
Research integrity is essentially a matter of behavior. It is embodied in the actions and decisions of scientists, rather than in the standards, codes, regulations and norms that aim to shape that behavior. Misconduct and other questionable research behaviors stand in sharp contrast to research integrity. Measures intended to promote research integrity should therefore be held to a behavioral standard. If they promote right behavior, they can be judged successful; if they show no association with proper or improper conduct, or if, paradoxically, they show evidence of increasing the likelihood of misconduct by scientists, then they are not successful.
This behavioral criterion is both simpler and tougher than more common evaluative criteria. Instruction in the responsible conduct of research (RCR) often relies on assessments of students’ reactions to hypothetical situations, or their understanding of ethical principles, or their knowledge of policies and rules. It is not often judged in...
KeywordsResponsible Conduct Group Mentor Research Integrity Senior Scientist Collective Openness
The author gratefully acknowledges helpful comments from Nicholas H. Steneck, Brian C. Martinson and Raymond De Vries on some of the ideas in this article, but accepts sole responsibility for the content and recommendations.
- 1.World conference on research integrity. (2007). [website]. Available at: http://www.esf.org/activities/esf-conferences/details/confdetail242/conference-information.html. Accessed October 10, 2007.
- 2.Anderson, M. S, Horn, A, Risbey, K. R., Ronning, E. A., De Vries, R., & Martinson, B. C. (2007). What do mentoring and training in the responsible conduct of research have to do with scientists’ misbehavior?: Findings from a national survey of NIH-funded scientists. Academic Medicine, 82, 853–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Office of research integrity. (2007). [website]. Available at: http://ori.dhhs.gov/. Accessed October 10, 2007.
- 4.Steneck, N. H. (2004). ORI Introduction to the Responsible Conduct of Research. Washington, D.C.: U.S Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
- 6.Bird, S. J. (1999). Including ethics in graduate education in scientific research. In J. M. Braxton & M. F. Fox (Eds.), Perspectives on scholarly misconduct in the sciences (pp. 174–188). Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
- 7.Macrina, F. L. (2005). Scientific integrity: Text and cases in responsible conduct of research, 3rd ed. Washington, D.C.: American Society for Microbiology Press.Google Scholar
- 8.Bulger, R. E., Heitman, E., Reiser, S. J. (Eds.). (2002). The ethical dimensions of the biological and health sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- 9.Shamoo, A. E., & Resnik, D. B. (2003). Responsible conduct of research. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- 15.Anderson, M. S., Ronning, E. A., de Vries, R., & Martinson, B. C. (2007) The perverse effects of competition on scientists’ work and relationships, Science and Engineering Ethics 13(4).Google Scholar
- 17.Grinnell, F. (2002). The impact of ethics on research. Chronicle of Higher Education, 49(6), B15.Google Scholar