Whether reports of scientific misconduct are accurate or whether publicized cases of irresponsible research represent merely the tip of the iceberg continues to be debated. Whereas high-profile cases of whistleblowers have attracted wide publicity, almost nothing is known about, gentler, behind-the-scenes collegial interventions that reduce the frequency of invalid or inappropriate research from entering the scientific literature. This project focuses on attempts at professional self-regulation when intentional or unintentional irresponsible science become known by colleagues. As examples, irresponsible science includes careless work habits, incompetent research, and inadequate supervision of research assistants, as well as fabrication and falsification. 2 online surveys will sample approximately 10,000 biomedical and social-behavioral researchers drawn from the pool of investigators receiving PHS funding. Respondents will be queried about their experiences dealing with several forms of irresponsible science committed by their peer colleagues or research assistants. Planned comparisons will elucidate the rate of learning about incidents first-hand or by hearsay, rate of intervention, circumstances under which intervention occurs, what differentiates good from poor outcomes, how belief in collective responsibility relates to actual intervention, why colleagues decide not to intervene, what acts seem more likely to elicit intervention, and differences in intervention patterns with colleague peers and research assistants. Confidential telephone interviews will be solicited from survey respondents and through announcements in scientific newsletters to explore more detailed qualitative factors involved in collegial intervention. Based on survey and interview findings, a guide to intervention will be sent to every investigator surveyed or interviewed, requesting feedback. The final guide will discuss strategies for intervention, and include disguised cases and role playing scenarios for training purposes and will be posted on a permanent public web page.
| Sieber, Joan E (2012) Witnesses to research wrongdoing. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics 7:3-14 |
