Advertisement

Science and Engineering Ethics

, Volume 21, Issue 4, pp 875–894 | Cite as

The Influence of Disclosure and Ethics Education on Perceptions of Financial Conflicts of Interest

  • Donald F. Sacco
  • Samuel V. Bruton
  • Alen Hajnal
  • Chris J. N. Lustgraaf
Original Paper

Abstract

This study explored how disclosure of financial conflicts of interest (FCOI) influences naïve or “lay” individuals’ perceptions of the ethicality of researcher conduct. On a between-subjects basis, participants read ten scenarios in which researchers disclosed or failed to disclose relevant financial conflicts of interest. Participants evaluated the extent to which each vignette represented a FCOI, its possible influence on researcher objectivity, and the ethics of the financial relationship. Participants were then asked if they had completed a college-level ethics course. Results indicated that FCOI disclosure significantly influenced participants’ perceptions of the ethicality of the situation, but only marginally affected perceptions of researcher objectivity and had no significant influence on perceptions of the existence of FCOIs. Participants who had previously completed a college-level ethics course appeared more sensitive to the importance of FCOI disclosure than those who lacked such background. This result suggests that formal ethical training may help individuals become more critical consumers of scientific research.

Keywords

Financial conflict of interest Disclosure Ethics Education 

References

  1. Allen, M. (2014). Payments to CEO raise new conflicts at top health quality group. Propublica, Feb. 12, http://www.propublica.org/article/payments-to-ceo-raise-new-conflicts-at-top-health-quality-group. Accessed April 16, 2014.
  2. Bekelman, J. E., Li, Y., & Gross, C. P. (2003). Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: A systematic review. Journal of the American Medical Association, 289, 454–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ben-Shahar, O., & Schneider, C. E. (2011). The failure of mandated disclosure. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 159, 647–749.Google Scholar
  4. Bero, L. A., & Rennie, D. (1996). Influences on the quality of published drug studies. International Journal of Technological Assessment and Health Care, 12, 209–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cain, D. M., Loewenstein, G., & Moore, D. A. (2011). When sunlight fails to disinfect: Understanding the perverse effects of disclosing conflicts of interest. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 836–857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carey, B., & Harris, G. (2008). Psychiatric group faces scrutiny over drug industry ties. The New York Times, July 12, A13.Google Scholar
  7. Chugh, D., Bazerman, M. H., & Banaji, M. R. (2005). Bounded ethicality as a psychological barrier to recognizing conflicts of interest. In D. Moore, G. Loewenstein, D. Cain, and M. H. Bazerman (Eds.), Conflicts of interest: Challenges and solutions in business, law, medicine and public policy (pp. 74–95). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. DeAngelis, C. D. (2006). The influence of money on medical science. Journal of the American Medical Association, 396, 996–998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dorsey, E. R., de Roulet, J., Thompson, J. P., Reminick, J. I., Thai, A., White-Stellato, Z., et al. (2010). Funding of US biomedical research, 2003–2008. Journal of the American Medical Association, 303, 137–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Elliott, C. (2013). Why the University of Minnesota psychiatric research scandal must be investigated. Minnesota Post, March 28, http://www.minnpost.com/community-voices/2013/03/why-university-minnesota-psychiatric-research-scandal-must-be-investigated. Accessed April 16, 2014.
  11. Elliott, K. C. (2008). Scientific judgment and the limits of conflict-of-interest policies. Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance, 15, 1–29.Google Scholar
  12. Ferris, L. E., & Fletcher, R. H. (2010). Conflict of interest in peer-reviewed medical journals; The World Association of Medical Editors position on a challenging problem. Journal of Young Pharmacists, 2(2), 113–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hampson, L. A., Agrawal, M., Joffe, S., Gross, C. P., Verter, J., & Emanuel, E. J. (2006). Patients’ views on financial conflicts of interest in cancer research trials. New England Journal of Medicine, 355, 2330–2337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Harris, G. (2008). Radio host has drug company ties. The New York Times, November 21, A14.Google Scholar
  15. Henry, T. (2012). Review of UT fracking study finds failure to disclose conflict of interest (updated). StateImpact Texas, https://stateimpact.npr.org/texas/2012/12/06/review-of-ut-fracking-study-finds-failure-to-disclose-conflict-of-interest/. Accessed April 15, 2014.
  16. Johnston, J. (2010). Financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research. In T. H. Murray & J. Johnston (Eds.), Trust and integrity in biomedical research: The case of financial conflicts of interest. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
  17. Kalichman, M. (2014). Rescuing responsible conduct of research (RCR) education. Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance, 21, 68–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kassirer, J. P. (2001). Financial conflict of interest: An unresolved ethical frontier. American Journal of Law and Medicine, 27, 149–162.Google Scholar
  19. Kesselheim, A. S., Robertson, C. T., Myers, J. A., Rose, S. L., Gillet, V., Ross, K. M., et al. (2012). A randomized study of how physicians interpret research funding disclosures. The New England Journal of Medicine, 367, 1119–1127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Korn, D. (2000). Conflicts of interest in biomedical research. Journal of the American Medical Association, 284(17), 2234–2237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Krimsky, S. (2012). Do financial conflicts of interest bias research? An inquiry into the “funding effect” hypothesis. Science, Technology and Human Values, 00, 1–22.Google Scholar
  22. Lemmens, T., & Luther, L. (2008). Financial conflict of interest in medical research. In P. A. Singer & A. M. Viens (Eds.), The Cambridge textbook of bioethics (pp. 222–230). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lexchin, J. (2012). Those who have the gold make the evidence: How the pharmaceutical industry biases the outcomes of clinical trials of medications. Science and Engineering Ethics, 18, 247–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lexchin, J., Bero, L. A., Djulbegovic, B., & Clark, O. (2003). Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: Systematic review. BMJ, 326, 1167–1176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lippert, S., Callaham, M. L., & Lo, B. (2011). Perceptions of conflict of interest disclosures among peer reviewers. PLoS ONE, 6(11), 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lipton, S., Boyd, E. A., & Bero, L. A. (2004). Conflicts of interest in academic research: Policies, processes, and attitudes. Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance, 119, 83–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lipworth, W. L., Kerridge, I. H., Carter, S. M., & Little, M. (2011). Journal peer review in context: A qualitative study of the social and subjective dimensions of manuscript review in biomedical publishing. Social Science and Medicine, 72, 1056–1063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Loewenstein, G., Cain, D. M., & Sah, S. (2011). The limits of transparency: Pitfalls and potential of disclosing conflicts of interest. American Economic Review, 101, 423–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Loewenstein, G., Sah, S., & Cain, D. M. (2012). The unintended consequences of conflict of interest disclosure. JAMA, 307, 669–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Loike, J. D., Rush, B. S., Schweber, A., & Fischbach, R. L. (2013). Lessons learned from undergraduate students in designing a science-based course in bioethics. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12, 701–710.Google Scholar
  31. Martinson, B. C., Anderson, M. S., & De Vries, B. (2005). Scientists behaving badly. Nature, 435, 737–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Matthews, C. M. (2012). Federal support for academic research. Congressional Research Service Report for Congress. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41895.pdf. Accessed April 16, 2014.
  33. Moore, D. A., & Loewenstein, G. (2004). Self-interest, automaticity, and the psychology of conflict of interest. Social Justice Research, 17, 189–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Moore, D. A., Tanlu, L., & Bazerman, M. H. (2010). Conflict of interest and the intrusion of bias. Judgment and Decision Making, 5, 37–53.Google Scholar
  35. Mundy, A. (2011). Senate panel hits Sanofi payments. The Wall Street Journal, B3.Google Scholar
  36. Resnik, D. B., & Elliott, K. C. (2013). Taking financial relationships into account when assessing research. Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance, 20, 184–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sah, S., Loewenstein, G., & Cain, D. M. (2013). The burden of disclosure: Increased compliance with distrusted advice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 289–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sax, J. K. (2012). Financial conflicts of interest in science. Annals of Health Law, 21, 291–328.Google Scholar
  39. Sax, J. K., & Doran, N. (2011). Evaluation of academic scientists’ responses to situations that pose a conflict of interest. Cancer Biology & Therapy, 12, 4–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shroter, S., Morris, J., Chaudhry, S., Smith, R., & Barratt, H. (2004). Does the type of competing interest statement affect readers’ perceptions of the credibility of research? Randomised trial. British Medical Journal, 328, 742–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Silverman, G. K., Loewenstein, G. F., Anderson, B. L., Ubel, P. A., Zinberg, S., & Schulkin., (2010). Failure to discount for conflict of interest when evaluating medical literature: A randomised trial of physicians. Journal of Medical Ethics, 36, 265–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sismondo, S. (2008). How pharmaceutical industry funding affects trial outcomes: Causal structures and responses. Social Science Medicine, 66, 1909–1914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Turrens, J. F. (2005). Teaching research integrity and bioethics to science undergraduates. Cell Biology Education, 4, 330–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. US Department of Health and Human Services. (2011). Responsibilities of applicants for promoting objectivity in research for which public health service funding is sought and responsible prospective contractors; final rule. 42 CFR, Part 50. Federal Register, 76, 53256–53293.Google Scholar
  45. Vasconcelos, S. M. R., Cassimiro, M. C., Martins, M. F. M., & Palácios, M. (2013). Addressing conflicts of interest in the research paper: A societal demand in contemporary science? Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 46, 1007–1013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wilson, R. F. (2010). The death of Jesse Gelsinger: New evidence of the influence of money and prestige in human research. American Journal of Law and Medicine, 36, 295–325.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Donald F. Sacco
    • 1
  • Samuel V. Bruton
    • 2
  • Alen Hajnal
    • 1
  • Chris J. N. Lustgraaf
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyThe University of Southern MississippiHattiesburgUSA
  2. 2.Department of Philosophy and ReligionThe University of Southern MississippiHattiesburgUSA

Personalised recommendations