FLICKR, STEAKPINBALLAs an unsuccessful whistleblower, I know first-hand that the system to deal with misconduct in science often fails. Details of my 14-year odyssey are on my website and in a November 2013 Nature article. I advocate that, to minimize scientific misconduct, we establish a better system for reporting and adjudicating it.
My story started when I witnessed what I believed—and were supported by a second observer to be—data fabrication. In short, numbers were recorded for samples that we believed did not exist. I followed the guidelines promulgated by my university for reporting perceived misconduct as closely as I could. I was referred to the Campus Committee on Research Integrity (CCRI), a standing committee of representatives of the various schools on the Newark campus of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey of which my employer, the New Jersey Medical School, was a part. Nine individuals sat on the CCRI. Some were administrators; there was a nurse, a midwife, a lawyer, and the vice president for research—none of whom had any expertise in the research ...
