Research Misconduct This workshop is part of the Responsible Conduct of Research Series A certificate is given for the completion of this workshop (see WSU Policy 2101 for Details on Misconduct). Don’t Lie, Cheat or Steal!.
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Research MisconductThis workshop is part of the Responsible Conduct of Research SeriesA certificate is given for the completion of this workshop(see WSU Policy 2101 for Details on Misconduct)
III. 1.Assessment Phase §2101.6.a.
Determination by RIO, with concurrence of DO, whether an an allegation of research misconduct meets criteria for being covered by this policy; proceed to Inquiry Phase, if it does. If either the complainant or respondent is a Bargaining Unit Faculty Member, the union must be notified before first contact with the respondent and be present in all phase of the process. This means assessment, inquiry and investigation
III.2. Inquiry Phase §2101.6.ab. - 2101.7.c.
Preliminary fact finding to determine whether an Investigation is warranted; involves the RIO, DO, and Inquiry Committee
III.3. Investigation Phase §2101.8.- §2101.9.
RIO sequesters records (if needed), notifies Respondent, appoints and charges an Investigation Committee; the Investigation Committee conducts interviews that are transcribed, pursues all leads, and prepares a draft report for the RIO; the RIO sends report to Respondent with request for comments, and submits, with Respondent comments, final report to DO
III.4. Outcomes. DO takes actions as specified in II.4. leading to either restoration of Respondent’s integrity, or administrative actions against Respondent including personnel actions and termination of research support by external funding agencies; protects Complainant against retributions.
The Respondent tampered with research materials related to five (5) immunoprecipitation/Western blot experiments and switched the labels on four cell culture dishes for cells used in the same type of experiments to cause false results to be reported.
The Respondent tampered with laboratory research materials by adding ethanol to his colleague's cell culture media, with the deliberate intent to effectuate the death of growing cells, which caused false results to be reported in the research record.
The Respondent eventually made an admission only after the UM police informed him that his actions in the laboratory had been videotaped.