Should the government assure scientific integrity?
The author argues that the somewhat Orwellian Office of Research Integrity needs careful scrutiny as to whether it should exist at all or whether its purported social benefits could be better achieved by other mechanisms. First, social issues specifically related to scientific misconduct need to be clarified so as to consider alternative regulatory measures. Constructive social policy requires balanced judgments that keep all goals in view and strives to promote science and to deal effectively with what may go awry (for example, falsification and fabrication, and plagiarism). Second, the regulation of scientific misconduct raises important questions, such as whether universities are able to police themselves. But is government regulation the best answer? The author suggests that a freestanding, nonprofit investigative foundation be formed and staffed by experts in investigations of scientific fraud as well as legal experts aware of investigative and due-process issues. Such a structure would remove the government from regulation (a boon) and relieve the university of the conflicts inherent in a duty to investigate and judge allegations. By the same token, the scientific community, including professional societies, would be at the center of the policing efforts of the foundation.
Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York.
D F
DF
Klein
D000046:Academic Medical Centers; D035843:Biomedical Research; D035082:Federal Government; D033161:Government Regulation; D006801:Humans; D015714:Plagiarism; D015871:Scientific Misconduct; D012926:Social Control, Formal; D012941:Social Responsibility; D014481:United States; D018172:United States Office of Research Integrity