Misconduct In Research: An Ethical Problem For All

Scientific misconduct, to most scientists, is an ethical issue in academic life. It is rapidly becoming a legal issue as well, which was underscored by the convening of a recent conference on the issue. The conference, entitled "Misconduct in Science--Recurring Issues, Fresh Perspectives," was held in Cambridge, Mass., on Nov. 15 and 16, 1991. The average scientist now has cause to worry. At the conference, Jules Hallum, director of the National Institutes of Health's Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI), summarized the activities of his organization, which investigates cases of alleged scientific misconduct in NIH-funded research. At its start in 1989, OSI had 70 cases; it has since resolved 110 cases and now faces a backlog of 70 more. Other agencies have their own staffs to handle such cases. Scientific misconduct, as defined by NIH, includes falsification of data or plagiarism--as well as practices that "seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted" by the scientific community. (The National Science Foundation has a similar definition.) Scientific misconduct is an offense with no statute of limitations and no significant body of case law to serve as precedent. Surely, egregious falsification or plagiarism is an outrage that should be punished. But as Eleanor Shore, dean for faculty affairs at Harvard Medical School, pointed out at the conference, science has a large gray zone of questionable practice, including failure to keep primary data, dropping of outlying data points, failure to randomize properly an experimental design, and so on. Scientific research, in practice, ranges from the most casual futzing around (some of which gets published) to studies done under excruciatingly high standards of quality control, such as drug studies performed under the Food and Drug Administration's Good Laboratory Practice guidelines. But sloppy or otherwise questionable science is not fraud. The feds are likely to prosecute only egregious misconduct. The difficulties for the average scientist will more likely arise within his or her own institution, which must, by federal regulations, inquire into any allegation of misconduct. An investigator might be caught up in proceedings with serious potential legal consequences, administered by ad hoc faculty committees, without receiving the legal protection normally given to the accused. Scientific misconduct is a legal issue masquerading as peer review. We can constructively respond in several ways. First, we need to define more clearly standards of acceptable scientific practice. What kinds of data should be stored, and for how long? How should authorship on papers be decided? How should potential conflicts of interest be avoided when the investigator has a financial stake in the outcome of his or her research? Some societies (for example, the American Society for Microbiology) are developing such standards; others need to do so as well. If we do not set standards for ourselves, others will do it for us. Second, we need to educate ourselves and our students about scientific misconduct, and the standards to which we will be held. NIH requires formal instruction in scientific ethics for all students supported by its training grants. These programs should be made available to all students, and to faculty as well. Finally, we need insurance coverage for legal costs in misconduct proceedings, either from professional liability insurance or indemnification by institutions them- selves. The problems scientists now face resemble those encountered decades ago by physicians. As described by D.J. Rothman in his book Strangers at the Bedside (New York, Basic Books, 1991), doctors were long accustomed to professional autonomy. In recent decades, they came under public attack for misuse of human subjects in research and other alleged abuses, and eventually had to accept oversight by lawyers and other nonphysicians. The same process is now happening in science. At least we can make a positive contribution toward its satisfactory resolution. Kenneth R. Foster is an associate professor of bioengineering at the University of Pennsylvania and chairman of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society's Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility.

Misconduct In Research: An Ethical Problem For All

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of