Literature DB >> 17847607

Research records and the resolution of misconduct allegations at research universities.

Kenneth Wilson1, Alan Schreier, Angel Griffin, David Resnik.   

Abstract

Accurate record keeping is an important part of the responsible conduct of research. However, there is very little empirical research on scientific record keeping. No one knows the incidence of serious problems with research records, the types of problems that occur, nor their consequences. In this study, we examined the role of research records in the resolution of misconduct allegations as a useful barometer for the incidence and types of problems that occur with records. We interviewed Research Integrity Officers (RIOs) at 90 major research universities and conducted focus groups with active research faculty. RIOs reported problems with research records in 38% of the 553 investigations they conducted. Severe problems with research records often prevented completion of investigations while problems that are more typical lengthened them by 2 to 3 weeks. Five types of poor record keeping practices accounted for 75 % of the problems with incomplete/inadequate records being the most common (30%). The focus groups concurred with the findings from the interviews with RIOs, stressed the importance of the research group leader in setting and maintaining record practices, and offered additional insights. While university officials and faculty members have suspected for many years that there are serious problems with research record keeping, our study provides empirical evidence for this belief. By documenting some of the problems with record keeping in university-based research, the results of our study provide information that will be useful for policy development at academic institutions.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17847607      PMCID: PMC3941006          DOI: 10.1080/08989620601126017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Account Res        ISSN: 0898-9621            Impact factor:   2.622


  6 in total

1.  Scientists behaving badly.

Authors:  Brian C Martinson; Melissa S Anderson; Raymond de Vries
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2005-06-09       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Academic research record-keeping: best practices for individuals, group leaders, and institutions.

Authors:  Alan A Schreier; Kenneth Wilson; David Resnik
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 6.893

3.  Normal Misbehavior: Scientists Talk about the Ethics of Research.

Authors:  Raymond de Vries; Melissa S Anderson; Brian C Martinson
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 1.742

4.  An unwelcome discovery. Walter DeNino was a young lab technician who analyzed data for his mentor, Eric Poehlman. What he found was that Poehlman was not the scientist he appeared to be.

Authors:  Jeneen Interlandi
Journal:  N Y Times Mag       Date:  2006-10-22

5.  Scientific misconduct. Researcher faces prison for fraud in NIH grant applications and papers.

Authors:  Eli Kintisch
Journal:  Science       Date:  2005-03-25       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Imanishi-Kari ruling slams ORI.

Authors:  J Kaiser; E Marshall
Journal:  Science       Date:  1996-06-28       Impact factor: 47.728

  6 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  The visibility of scientific misconduct: A review of the literature on retracted journal articles.

Authors:  Felicitas Hesselmann; Verena Graf; Marion Schmidt; Martin Reinhart
Journal:  Curr Sociol       Date:  2016-10-13
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.