Sanctions and remediation for research misconduct: differential diagnosis, treatment, and prevention.
The last decade of experience indicates that the number of confirmed instances of research misconduct remains extremely small. Yet, each institution that has had an investigation recognizes how damaging even one case is to the scientific enterprise in terms of the morale of scientists working with or near the one found guilty, in terms of public trust in the research enterprise, and in terms of the consumption of extraordinary amounts of faculty effort to conduct a fair and thorough investigation of the allegation. Every research institution has a strong interest in developing its diagnostic, treatment, and preventive capacities to the point where this scientific illness is as nearly eradicated as possible. The author suggests a spectrum of responses to match the spectrum of offenses in order to protect the scientist, the scientific community, the institution, and the public. In some instances remediation as well as sanctions may be indicated. Remediation in this context applies both to the scientist and to the research institution because both may have problems that need correction or modification to ensure the integrity of science. Institutional improvement in developing and applying sanctions and remediation should contribute both to more effective treatment and to better prevention strategies.
Shore
E G
EG
Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115.
D000046:Academic Medical Centers; D035843:Biomedical Research; D035082:Federal Government; D033161:Government Regulation; D006801:Humans; D012106:Research; D015871:Scientific Misconduct / Q000523:psychology*; D012926:Social Control, Formal