EVALUATION OF THE RESEARCH NORMS OF SCIENTISTS AND ADMINISTRATORS RESPONSIBLE FOR ACADEMIC RESEARCH INTEGRITY

Context.-The professional integrity of scientists is important to soci ety as a whole and particularly to disciplines such as medicine that d epend heavily on scientific advances for their progress. Objective.-To characterize the professional norms of active scientists and compare them with those of individuals with institutional responsibility for t he conduct of research. Design.-A mailed survey consisting of 12 scena rios in 4 domains of research ethics. Respondents were asked whether a n act was unethical and, if so, the degree to which they considered it unethical and to select responses and punishments for the act. Partic ipants.-A total of 924 National Science Foundation research grantees i n 1993 or 1994 in molecular or cellular biology and 140 representative s from the researchers' institutions to the US Department of Health an d Human Services Office of Research Integrity. Main Outcome Measures.- Percentage of respondents considering an act unethical and the mean ma lfeasance rating on a scale of 1 to 10. Results.-A total of 606 resear ch grantees and 91 institutional representatives responded to the surv ey (response rate of 69% of those who could be contacted). Respondents reported a hierarchy of unethical research behaviors. The mean malfea sance rating was unrelated to the characteristics of the investigator performing the hypothetical act or to its consequences. Fabrication, f alsification, and plagiarism received malfeasance ratings higher than 8.6, and virtually all thought they were unethical. Deliberately misle ading statements about a paper or failure to give proper attribution r eceived ratings between 7 and 8. Sloppiness, oversights, conflicts of interest, and failure to share were less serious still, receiving malf easance ratings between 5 and 6. Institutional representatives propose d more and different interventions and punishments than the scientists . Conclusions.-Surveyed scientists and institutional representatives h ad strong and similar norms of professional behavior, but differed in their approaches to an unethical act.