BUILDING A
VISION
RESEARCH AT UC DAVIS
Integrity in Research
Preventing and Investigating
Research/Scientific Misconduct
Lynne Chronister
Associate Vice Chancellor for Research
University of California, Davis
Tokyo, Japan
February 22, 2007
OFFICE OF RESEARCH
The right to search for truth implies also a duty; one must
not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true.
Albert Einstein
2
Standards and Regulations
– Code of Federal Regulations (42 CFR 93)
– Federal Laws and Notices
– Agency specific Requirements (DHHS, NSF)
– State Laws
– System Policies
– Campus Policies
3
Research Misconduct - Definition
“…fabrication, falsification or plagiarism in
proposing, performing or reviewing
research or in reporting research results.”
“Research misconduct does not include honest
error or differences of opinion.”
4
A Finding of Research
Misconduct Requires:
– A significant departure from accepted practices
of the relevant community; AND
– The misconduct be committed:
intentionally
knowingly
recklessly; AND
– The allegation be proven by a preponderance of
the evidence (51%; more likely than not).
5
What is “Recklessly”
An Individual makes a false, fabricated or
plagiarized representation with callous
disregard as to whether or not it is true or
requires attribution to another.
6
“Recklessly”
“The
individual had a high degree of awareness of
the probable falsity or misleading nature or
source of the representation or, in fact,
entertained serious doubts as to the truth of the
representation. The subjective awareness of the
falsity or misleading nature of a representation
can be inferred from evidence indicating that
there were obvious reasons to doubt the
accuracy of the representation and the individual
did not act reasonably in dispelling those
doubts.”
7
The Conduct of Science
–
Scientific Integrity
– Good Science
– Error or Carelessness
– Bad Science
– Misconduct or Non-Compliance
8
Overview of Process at the
University of California, Davis
Step 1 Preliminary Assessment by Knowledgeable
individual
Step 2 Inquiry Phase
- Appropriate appointment of members
and training and charge to committee
helps to avoid bias
9
Step 3
Investigation Phase
Step 4
Potential Repercussions, Remediation
Expertise
1. Compliance Officer is an Attorney
2. Preliminary assessment - Knowledge of Discipline
3. Inquiry and Investigation - Knowledge of Discipline
plus peer representative (e.g., Graduate Studies)
- Generally three members
- Sign Conflict of Interest statement
- Sign Confidentiality agreement
- Generally all internal members
10
It is not permitted to the most equitable
of men to be a judge in his own cause.
Blaise Pascal (1670)
11
Cooperation with
Inquiry/Investigation
1. University Employees are compelled to cooperate by virtue
of employment.
2. Former Employees cannot be compelled to cooperate. The
investigation would continue under most circumstances.
3. Non-university involvement - in some instances there may be
a legal mandate to cooperate.
4. Involvement of federal funds is a compelling factor for noninstitutional employees
5. In absence of a legal mandate-persuasion may be the only
option.
6. Lack of cooperation falls under UC Davis faculty misconduct
not scientific misconduct (APM 015)
12
Institutional Authority
Committees have little power/authority. Can only
recommend. The authority is vested in the institution.
Must work in cooperation with external individuals and
institutions. If federal funds are involved, anyone in
receipt of the funds must comply with Federal
regulations.
Campus authorities can sequester material/information.
13
Process Issues
Frequently an investigation will expand to other
individuals including allegations of retaliation and
counter allegations by the accused.
If additional information is uncovered during the
investigation, the investigation would be expanded.
Generally the existing committee would handle the
expanded allegation.
If possible criminal activities were uncovered, the
investigation would continue unless the responsible
government agency (e.g. police, justice) requested that
the inquiry/investigation be put on hold.
14
Process Costs
Financial costs are not recorded nor reimbursed by a
sponsoring agency. The institutional costs may be
incorporated into the negotiated federal indirect cost
rate.
The human/personal costs are extremely high and
include; loss of prestige, personal anxiety, position,
scientific standing in the community.
15
Investigation Outcomes: Exoneration
Survey of Accused but Exonerated Individuals n
Research Misconduct Cases
June 30, 1996
Lawrence Rhoades, PhD
DHHS, Office of Research Integrity
“Sixty percent of the respondents reported
experiencing one or more negative
consequences of being accused of scientific
misconduct even though the allegation was
unsupported”
16
UC Davis P&P Manual § 240-01
Sanctions & Administrative Actions
• Withdrawal or correction of all pending or published
papers
• Removal of person from project, letter of reprimand,
special monitoring of future work, probation,
suspension, salary reduction, termination of
employment
• If no misconduct found, institution to undertake
reasonable efforts to restore accused’s
reputation
17
Exoneration con’t
“… It appears important for institutions to consult
with those exonerated of research misconduct to
develop a plan for restoring their reputations and
to take action, unless specifically requested not
to by respondents…”
Most important action-officially notifying
institutional officials.
18
Investigation Outcomes:
Finding of Misconduct
UC Davis:
If the preliminary investigation determines that human
health or other serious impact is or reasonably
could occur, the research can be temporarily
suspended.
Process:
1. Investigation Committee makes recommendation of
misconduct to Vice Chancellor for Research
2. Vice Chancellor accepts or rejects recommendation
3. If accepted, forwards to Vice Provost for Academic
Affairs, Faculty Senate, or Human Resources.
19
Protections
No formal provision for graduate students, post
doctoral fellows and other employees when
funding is terminated or suspended. Generally
local institutional policies will apply.
Whistleblower protections are in place to guard
against retaliation.
20
Prevention
– Responsible Conduct of Research Training
– Laboratory Management Training
– Appropriate Policies and Processes
21
Responsible Conduct of Research
Training
– Responsible Conduct of Research
•
•
•
•
Conflict of Interest
Mentor/Mentee Relationships
Research Misconduct
Entrepreneurship/Intellectual Property
Research Collaborations Data Acquisition / Animal Welfare
Authorship & Publication
– Human Subjects Protection
– Animal Subjects Protection
– Environmental Health and Safety
•
•
•
•
•
22
Field safety
Boating safety
Radiological safety
Biosafety
Lab Safety
Laboratory Leadership and
Management
John C. Galland, Ph.D.
Director, Laboratory Management Institute
University of California, Davis Office of Research
Laboratory Management
Institute
™
Better Science through
Better ManagementSM
23
Five Pillars of Laboratory Education
Distinguished Career
Breakthrough Science
Laboratory Management Skills
L
E
A
D
E
R
S
H
I
P
M
A
N
A
G
• Vision
E
• Mission
• Goal Setting M
• Strategic
E
Planning
• Innovation N
T
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
People
Money
Time
Material
Project
Quality
Informati
on
C
O
M
P
L
I
A
N
C
E
• Policy &
H
Procedures
• Regulations E
• Technology A
Transfer
L
• Conflict of
T
Commitment
H
• Conflict of
&
Interest
• Intellectual S
Property
A
• Patents/
F
Copyrights/
E
TM
• Contractual T
Requirements Y
• Health,
Safety, &
Security
• Employee
• Research
Subjects
• Human
Subjects
• Environment
• Emergency
Preparedness
E
T
H
I
C
S
• Authorship
• Integrity
• Academic
Freedom
• Ownership
Basic & Scientific Discipline Skills
24
©JCG 07/2005
Purpose of LMI is to help scientists
become more:
Productive
Efficient
Organized
Satisfied
Innovative
Compliant
Safe
25
Successful
ありがとう
Lynne Chronister
Associate Vice Chancellor for Research
Luchronister@ucdavis.edu
http://research.ucdavis.edu
530-747-3812
26