PUNISHMENT FOR UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR IN THE CONDUCT OF RESEARCH

Purpose. To investigate the perceptions of scientists and institutiona l representatives (IRs) to the National Institutes of Health's Office of Research Integrity concerning appropriate punishment for unethical research behavior. Method. In 1994-95, 606 scientists and 91 IRs rated the ethical behaviors of and suggested appropriate punishments for pr otagonists in randomly generated scenarios describing scientific resea rch behaviors. The authors evaluated the relationships of the suggeste d punishments to the protagonists' behaviors and characteristics, and compared recommendations of the scientists and IRs. Results. The respo ndents suggested punishments for 80% of the scenarios that were rated unethical. Punishments were more often prescribed for behaviors rated more unethical and for repeat offenders. The type of punishment was re lated to the protagonist's academic status and the nature olf the unet hical behavior. IRs proposed more and different punishments than did s cientists. Conclusion. Scientists and IRs proposed that most unethical research behaviors be punished. The decision to punish depended on th e unethical level of the behavior. The type of punishment depended on the aims: correcting the wrong, rehabilitation, or sanction. Variation in the respondents' selections of punishments and the IRs' greater pr opensity to punish suggest that scientists committing similar ethical violations may receive different punishments. Explicit consideration o f which punishment is merited under what circumstances should be under taken by the scientific community.