1 / 13

Handling Research Misconduct Allegations: Promoting Research Integrity

This presentation discusses the process of handling research misconduct allegations and promoting research integrity, including inquiry, investigation, adjudication, and final decision. It emphasizes the importance of having a comprehensive policy, documenting evidence, and making balanced decisions.

spablo
Download Presentation

Handling Research Misconduct Allegations: Promoting Research Integrity

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation 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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Handling Research Misconduct Allegations &Promoting Research IntegrityScott J. Moore, Ph.D., J.D.Investigative ScientistNational Science Foundation Office of Inspector GeneralResearch Integrity and Administrative Investigations Division Promoting the Responsible Conduct of Research for College and University LeadersLoyola Marymount University – April 14-15, 2016

  2. The Basic Process • Define a problem • Ask questions & collect evidence • Draw conclusions • Reconsider • Finalize conclusions • Allegations • Inquiry & • Investigation • Adjudication • Appeal • Final Decision Looks like the scientific method Looks like the legal process

  3. Take home message • Be prepared- Have a comprehensive, up-to-date policy to guide you. • Every case is unique- A good policy will get you through twists and detours. • Document, Document, Document- This is the support for your decision. • Go where the evidence takes you- Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How. • Make a final, balanced decision- Make it timely, focused, and clear.

  4. Before Allegation Inquiry Investigation Report & Decision After Research Misconduct Management Plan Does your community know your policy? And where to find it? Will they act according to policy? To whom does your policy apply? Do they know that it applies to them? Is there buy-in at all levels? How is it integrated with other policies? (e.g., data management, authorship, IRB, IACUC, financial COI) Does your General Counsel know you yet?

  5. Before Allegation Inquiry Investigation Report & Decision After Research Misconduct Management Plan Can the allegation be anonymous? Must it be written? Is the complainant an entity (a journal or an agency)? Who receives the allegation? What should the allegation contain? Does the allegation impact research supported internally or externally? Is there any imminent harm or immediate need for action?

  6. Before Allegation Inquiry Investigation Report & Decision After Research Misconduct Management Plan What evidence do you secure? When? How? Who conducts your inquiry? What are the confidentiality requirements? What is the end product of the inquiry? What are the notification requirements? What is the timeframe for the inquiry? What do you do with admissions of guilt?

  7. Before Allegation Inquiry Investigation Report & Decision After Research Misconduct Management Plan How are COIs identified and managed? What are the elements of a finding? Do they differ from NSF’s? What is the process for adding Subjects or allegations? How is testimony corroborated? How do you handle subjects and witnesses at other institutions?

  8. Committees are usually ad hoc and composed of faculty members without any specialized training in investigating. • They are out of their comfort zone. • They are worried about getting sued. • They will gravitate back to their comfort zone at any opportunity. • They are like juries, except they can ask the questions. Like juries, they need instructions. • A RIO (with the help of counsel) should: • guide them back into the investigation zone; • not influence their assessment; • provide the context for consistency. • OIG has resources. • The OIG Case Lead / Case Attorney • The OIG committee briefing • The OIG website • Semiannual reports • Case closeout memoranda online.

  9. Before Allegation Inquiry Investigation Report & Decision After Research Misconduct Management Plan Are you analyzing the science or the misconduct? What is pattern evidence and where do you look? What can you use it for? What can you secure? How should you secure it? Data, Notebooks, Instrument records, Samples, Email(?) Can the research proceed? Where else may the evidence be?

  10. Before Allegation Inquiry Investigation Report & Decision After Research Misconduct Management Plan To whom is the draft distributed for comments? Who is the deciding official? What if individuals have left the institution? What are potential legal implications? Are the final conclusions reasonable and supported by the evidence?

  11. Before Allegation Inquiry Investigation Report & Decision After Research Misconduct Management Plan How long do consequences last and who monitors them? Are policy revisions necessary? How do completed cases affect RCR training? How is public disclosure and/or complaint handled? What if the subject has left the institution?

  12. NSF OIG Research Integrity and Administrative Investigations Division Jim Kroll, Director Aaron Manka, Scott Moore, Aliza Sacknovitz Rachel Allbritten, Erik Runko, Cynthia Davis, Valerie Hillgren

  13. Contact Information www.nsf.gov/oig Hotline: 1-800-428-2189 E-mail: oig@nsf.gov Fax: (703) 292-9158 • 4201 Wilson Boulevard • Suite II-705 • Arlington, VA 22230 • ATTN: OIG HOTLINE

More Related