Abstract
Prompted by the Macchiarini research fraud case, an Act on Research Misconduct was introduced in Sweden in January 2020. In accordance with international convention, it defines unlawful research misconduct as “…severe deviation from good research practice in the form of fabrication, falsification or plagiarism.” To qualify as severe, the misconduct must be either intentional or caused by serious neglect. Universities are obliged to report suspected cases for investigation by a newly established governmental agency. The Act does not include regulation of penalties or sanctions. The expected consequences of the Act and its limitations are discussed. The crucial roles of universities and scientific journals in the prevention of misconduct remain, and improved European legislation to protect whistleblowers is described. Future directions in the struggle against research misconduct include use of technical advances to detect data and image manipulation.
Information in this chapter was modified from the author’s Swedish popular science book—Kjell Asplund (2021) Fuskarna: Om Macchiarinis och andras svek mot vetenskapen (The frauds: On the betrayal of science by Macchiarini and others). Fri Tanke, Stockholm, Sweden
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adam D (2019) The data detective. Nature 571:462–464
ALLEA (European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities) The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2017). Revised edition. allea.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/ALLEA-European-Code-of-Conduct-for-Research-Integrity-2017.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2021
Anonymous (2003) The ethical review act. onep.se/media/2348/the_ethical_review_act.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2021
Anonymous (2019) The Swedish criminal code. legislationline.org/download/id/8662/file/Sweden_criminal_code_am2020_en.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2021
Anonymous (2020) Ökad trygghet för visselblåsare [Improved protection of whistleblowers, summary in English]. SOU 2020:38. regeringen.se/rattsliga-dokument/statens-offentliga-utredningar/2020/06/sou-202038/. Accessed 12 May 2021
Asplund K, Blom N, Johansson K, et al (2016) The Macchiarini case. Investigation of the synthetic trachea transplantations at Karolinska University Hospital. Summary in English. sll.se/globalassets/1.-halsa-och-vard/bilagor---nyhet/bilagor-nyheter-2016/the-macchiarini-case-summary-eng.pdf?_t_id=jn7cuiNjRit3scHO1EqPDA%3d%3d&_t_uuid=4fsLCHhJQcCQKsxlbS0bwQ&_t_q=macchiarini&_t_tags=language%3asv%2csiteid%3a8824540f-e7eb-44a0-94f3-c48a0b63798c%2candquerymatch&_t_hit.id=PublicWebv2_Cms_EPiSrvr_EpiDependencies_Document/94&_t_hit.pos=3. Accessed 12 May 2021
Bik EM, Casadevall A, Fang FC (2016) The prevalence of inappropriate image duplication in biomedical research publications. MBio 7(3):e00809–e00816
Carlisle JB (2017) Data fabrication and other reasons for non-random sampling in 5087 randomised, controlled trials in anaesthetic and general medical journals. Anaesthesia 72:944–952
Choe S-H (2009, October 26) Disgraced cloning expert convicted in South Korea. New York Times. nytimes.com/2006/05/12/health/12iht-korea.1725751.html. Accessed 12 May 2021
Cyranoski D (2016, February 4) Artificial-windpipe pioneer under scrutiny again. Nature (News Article)
Dr Geoff (2017) Scott S Reuben – anesthesiologist who went to prison for faking pain control trials. drgeoffnutrition.wordpress.com/2017/11/19/scott-s-reuben-anesthesiologist-who-went-to-prison-for-faking-pain-control-trials/. Accessed 12 May 2021
Ekbom A, Helgesen G, Lunde T, et al (2006) Report by the investigation commission. Summary in English. web.archive.org/web/20060920200752/rikshospitalet.no/content/res_bibl/6633.pdf. Accessed 12 May 2021
European Union Directive (EU) 2019/1937. //eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32019L1937&from=EN. Accessed 12 May 2021
Fountain H (2014, November 24) Leading surgeon is accused of misconduct in experimental transplant operations. New York Times. nytimes.com/2014/11/25/world/leading-surgeon-is-accused-of-misconduct-in-experimental-transplant-operations.html. Accessed 12 May 2021
Hedin U-C, Månsson S-A (2008) Repressalier mot kritiker i offentliga organisationer [Reprisals against critics in public organizations]. Summary in English. Socialvetenskaplig Tidskrift 3–4:276–294
Jungebluth P, Alici E, Baiguera S et al (2011) Tracheobronchial transplantation with a stem-cell-seeded bioartificial nanocomposite: a proof-of-concept study (Retracted). Lancet 378:1997–2004
Karolinska Institute (2016) External inquiry finds Paolo Macchiarini guilty of misconduct. news.ki.se/external-inquiry-finds-paolo-macchiarini-guilty-of-misconduct. Accessed 12 May 2021
Kintisch E (2006, June 28) Poehlman sentenced to 1 year in prison. Science Magazine
Lennane J (2012) What happens to whistleblowers, and why. Social Med 6:249–258
Lynøe N, Lambertz G (2013) Gör forskningsfusk straffbart! [ Make research fraud punishable] Läkartidningen 110:CDAI
Marks DF (2019) The Hans Eysenck affair: time to correct the scientific record. J Health Psychol 24:409–420
Mehra MR, Desai SS, Ruschitzka F et al (2020a) RETRACTED: Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis. Lancet S0140–6736:31180–31186
Mehra MR, Desai SS, Kuy SR et al (2020b) Cardiovascular disease, drug therapy, and mortality in Covid-19 (retracted). N Engl J Med 382(25):e102
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Committee on Responsible Science (2017) Fostering integrity in research. National Academies Press, Washington DC
Pelosi AJ (2019) Personality and fatal diseases: revisiting a scientific scandal. J Health Psychol 24:421–439
Retraction Watch (2021) The Retraction Watch leaderboard. retractionwatch.com/the-retraction-watch-leaderboard/. Accessed 12 May 2021
Shen H (2020) Meet this super-spotter of duplicated images in science papers. Nature 581:132–136
Smith R, Brown AJ (2008) The good, the bad and the ugly: whistleblowing outcomes. In: Brown AJ (ed) Whistleblowing in the Australian Public Sector. Australian National University, Canberra, pp 109–136
Swedish Council for Higher Education (2019) Act on responsibility for good research practice and the examination of research misconduct (2019:504). uhr.se/en/start/laws-and-regulations/Laws-and-regulations/act-on-responsibility-for-good-research-practice/. Accessed 12 May 2021
Swedish Research Council. The Swedish Research Barometer (2019) The Swedish research system in international comparison [Summary in English]. vr.se/english/analysis/swedish-research-in-figures.html. Accessed 12 May 2021
US Department of Health & Human Services (2021) The Office of Research Integrity. ori.hhs.gov/. Accessed 12 May 2021
Williams KM, Nathanson C, Paulhus DL (2010) Identifying and profiling scholastic cheaters: their personality, cognitive ability, and motivation. J Exp Psychol Appl 16:293–307
Conflicts of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Asplund, K. (2022). Legislation on Research Misconduct: Rationales and Reflections—A Swedish Perspective. In: Faintuch, J., Faintuch, S. (eds) Integrity of Scientific Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99680-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-99680-2_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-99679-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-99680-2
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)