Responsible Conduct of Research:
what it is, what it isn’t, and the
consequences of misconduct
Development of Professional Skills for Scientists and Engineers
August 29, 2012
Catherine Paquet, Director, Office of Research Ethics and Integrity
Tim Stanley,Vice-Dean, Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies
1
What does Responsible Conduct of
Research (RCR) include?
The collection,
 the use,
 the retention, and
 the sharing of data.

2
Ethics and Method
1.
2.
3.
Ethics often an afterthought
All research balances cost and benefit
Ethics is a question of method
3
What this means
Integrity is the central principle of
academic life.
 Honest report findings
 Honest sharing of credit
 Acknowledging the contributions of
others

4
Why is RCR important?

Without it there can be harms to:
◦ Participants
◦ The research community
◦ Research itself / development of knowledge
Risk of losing the confidence of both the
lay and professional communities
 Researchers’ responsibility to use public
funds appropriately

5
What is RCR?



Using a high level of rigour in proposing and performing research;
in recording, analyzing, and interpreting data; and in reporting and
publishing data and findings.
Keeping complete and accurate records of data,
methodologies and findings, including graphs and images, in
accordance with the applicable funding agreement, institutional
policies and/or laws, regulations, and professional or disciplinary
standards in a manner that will allow verification or replication of
the work by others.
Referencing and, where applicable, obtaining permission for the
use of all published and unpublished work, including data, source
material, methodologies, findings, graphs and images.
From Tri-Agency Framework (2011)
6
What is RCR? (cont’d)
Including as authors, with their consent, all those and
only those who have materially or conceptually
contributed to, and share responsibility for, the
contents of the publication or document, in a manner
consistent with their respective contributions, and
authorship policies of relevant publications.
 Acknowledging, in addition to authors, all
contributors and contributions to research, including
writers, funders and sponsors.
 Appropriately managing any real, potential or
perceived conflict of interest, in accordance with the
institution's policy on conflict of interest in research.

From Tri-Agency Framework (2011)
7
Conflict of Interest (COI)
A situation where a person or organization has several interests which
could compete against each other and where these could possibly affect
their actions or professional judgment in regards to one of these interests.
 It can include

◦ Financial, professional or personal considerations or commitments;
◦ Being in a position to influence, either directly or indirectly, business, research, or
other;
◦ A situation in which an existing relationship with a party might prejudice decisions
with respect to a certain activity.

COIs may be:
◦ potential,
◦ actual, or
◦ apparent or perceived

The presence of a conflict of interest in itself does not automatically mean
that and individual or organization has done something wrong. It may be
possible to manage them but they MUST be disclosed.
8
What RCR isn’t (and what constitutes
misconduct)
Term
Definition
Fabrication:
Making up data, source material, methodologies or
findings, incl. graphs &images.
Falsification:
Manipulating, changing, or omitting data, source
material, methodologies or findings, [...], without
acknowledgement and which results in inaccurate
findings or conclusions.
Destruction of research
records:
The destruction of one's own or another's research
data or records to specifically avoid the detection of
wrongdoing or in contravention of [...] laws, regulations
and professional or disciplinary standards.
Plagiarism:
Presenting and using another's published or unpublished
work, including theories, concepts, data, source material,
methodologies or findings, including graphs and images,
as one's own, without appropriate referencing and,
if required, without permission.
From Tri-Agency Framework (2011)
9
What it isn’t (cont’d)
Term
Definition
Redundant
publications:
The re-publication of one's own previously published work
or part there of, or data, in the same or another language,
without adequate acknowledgment of the source, or
justification.
Invalid authorship:
Inaccurate attribution of authorship, including attribution of
authorship to persons other than those who have contributed
sufficiently to take responsibility for the intellectual content, or
agreeing to be listed as author to a publication for which one
made little or no material contribution.
Inadequate
acknowledgement:
Failure to appropriately recognize contributions of
others in a manner consistent with their respective
contributions and authorship policies of relevant publications.
Mismanagement
of Conflict of
Interest:
Failure to appropriately manage any real, potential or
perceived conflict of interest, in accordance with the
Institution's policy on conflict of interest in research.
IS NOT
honest error or differences of opinion
10
The Nature of the Academic
Contract
1.
2.
3.
4.
Public
Results/Findings Reproducible
Full Disclosure of All Relevant
Information
Peer Review
11
Examples of Misconduct
12
Case 1:
1953 – James Watson & Francis Crick
The case
• Discovered the structure of DNA, for which they eventually would share the Nobel
Prize in 1962.
• Secretly obtained key x-ray diffraction data from Rosalind Franklin without her
permission.
• “Many voices have argued that the Nobel Prize should also have been awarded to
Rosalind Franklin, since her experimental data provided a very important piece of
evidence leading to the solving of the DNA structure.
The issues
• Plagiarism
• Inadequate aknowledgment
The consequences
• Watson & Crick were awarded the Nobel prize but R. Franklyn was not awarded one
because she died in 1953 and the prize is not awarded posthumously.
Nobelprize.org. 15 Aug 2012
13
Case 2:
1974 – William Summerlin
The case
• Used a black felt-tip pen to darken patches of fur on a white mouse—to serve as
proof of his astonishing claim that he could transplant skin grafts between unrelated
individuals without immune rejection.
• Summerlin’s claims dissolved when a dab of rubbing alcohol washed the so-called
transplants away.
• Summerlin quickly confessed and blamed the “pressure cooker” atmosphere at the
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center.
The issues
• Falsification
The consequences:
• An institute committee attributed Summerlin’s actions to a “serious emotional
disturbance” and put him on sick leave with a year of pay.
• Summerlin never returned to the center, but reportedly moved to rural Louisiana to
work in obscurity as a doctor.
•“This was so bizarre because [misconduct] cases are usually so much more
complicated,” says colleague John Leavitt, now a biotech consultant. “But this was simply
a guy with a Magic Marker.”
NATURE MEDICINE VOLUME 12 | NUMBER 5 | MAY 2006
14
Case 3:
1998 – Andrew Wakefield
The case
• Research on Autism
• Had financial interest in proving vaccine was responsible for Autism
• Very selective choice of participants (almost all had previous issues)
The issues
• Mismanagement of Conflict of Interest
• Falsification
The consequences
• Barred from practicing medicine in the UK
• Various journals retracted his articles
• Less people getting their children vaccinated has lead to rise in cases of measles
15
Case 4:
2004-2006 – Woo-Suk Huang
The case
• Research on somatic cell nuclear transfer (stem cell research)
• Coerced female lab members into donating eggs for his research
• Multiplied the number of stem cells by manipulating his data (2 vs. 11),
manipulated photos of cells
Issues
• Fabrication
• Falsification
• Unprofessional conduct
Consequences
• He was fired from Seoul National University
• Eventually indicted on fraud and embezzlement charges (2006)
East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal (2008) 2:1–7
DOI 10.1007/s12280-008-9041-x
16
http://easts.dukejournals.org/content/2/1/1.full.pdf+html
Regulations
17
University of Ottawa Regulations

FGPS Guidelines for the Ethical conduct of Research and Procedures for
Investigating Misconduct
◦ Section 3: Guidelines for the Ethical Conduct of Research
◦ Section 4: Procedure for Investigating Reports of Misconduct in
Research
◦ http://www.grad.uottawa.ca/Default.aspx?tabid=1385

APUO collective agreement
◦ Section10: Professional ethics
◦ Section 13: Grievances and arbitration

APTPUO Collective Agreement
◦ Article 2.6 Ethical Behaviour
◦ Section 4: Complaints, grievance and arbitration procedure
◦ Section 6: Discipline and Discharge
18
Canadian federal regulations

Tri-Agency Framework: Responsible Conduct Of Research (2011)
◦
◦

Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, 2nd edition (2010)
◦
◦

Joint policy of CIHR, NSERC & SSHRC
Sets out the responsibilities and corresponding policies for researchers, Institutions, and the
Agencies re RCR, including how to handle allegations of a breach of policy.
Joint policy Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), Natural Sciences and Engineering
Research Council of Canada (NSERC) & Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of
Canada (SSHRC)
Core principles: respect for persons, concern for welfare, justice
Secretariat on Responsible Conduct of Research provides support for
◦
◦
◦
Federal research granting Agencies (CIHR, NSERC and SSHRC)
Panel on Responsible Conduct of Research (PRCR) – for the Framework
Panel on Research Ethics (PRE) – for the TCPS2

All institutions receiving funds from the Agencies must abide by the policies set out in the
Framework andTCPS2

Professional associations usually have their own regulations as well.
19
Canadian federal regulations
(cont’d)
Panel
Document
Mandate (edited)
Panel on
Research Ethics
(PRE)
Tri-Council Policy
Statement: Ethical
Conduct for Research
Involving Humans,
2nd edition (TCPS
2) (2008 & 2010)
• promote high ethical standards of
conduct in research involving humans;
• TCPS 2 interpretations;
• identify educational activities and
mandate the Secretariat to implement
and promote them;
• recognize the diversity of approaches
used in research involving humans;
Panel on
Responsible
Conduct of
Research
(PRCR)
Tri-Agency
Framework:
Responsible Conduct
of Research (the
Framework) (2011)
• consider allegations of breaches of TriAgency policies by reviewing institutional
investigation reports;
• recommend recourse, if appropriate;
• provide advice to the Agencies on
matters related to the responsible
conduct of research & on revisions to
the Framework; and
20
U.S. Office of Research Integrity
(ORI) – the Lab

http://ori.hhs.gov/TheLab

Description
In "The Lab: Avoiding Research Misconduct," you
become the lead characters in an interactive
movie and make decisions about integrity in
research that can have long-term consequences.
The simulation addresses Responsible Conduct of
Research topics such as avoiding research
misconduct, mentorship responsibilities, handling
of data, responsible authorship, and questionable
research practices.
21
What should you do if you suspect
misconduct has taken place?







Make sure your understanding of the event is
accurate – an accusation can seriously hurt
someone’s reputation even if it isn’t true.
Consult others to see if they agree.
Don’t make any accusation without proof.
Know the University’s and your field’s rules.
If you can, get someone with experience to back
you up.
Report to someone who isn’t / shouldn’t be in a
conflict of interest (Dean, FGPS,VPR).
FYI: The University does not investigate
anonymous allegations.
22
Resources and references
23
24
Resources and links

Panel on Responsible Conduct of Research
◦ http://www.rcr.ethics.gc.ca/eng/index/

Tri-Council Policy Statement:
Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans
(2nd ed. 2010)
◦ http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/policypolitique/initiatives/tcps2-eptc2/Default/

Tri-Agency Framework: Responsible Conduct Of
Research
◦ http://www.rcr.ethics.gc.ca/eng/policypolitique/framework-cadre/
25
Refs



SRA 2011 presentation by Debra Schaller-Demers,
Director, Research Outreach and Compliance, Memorial
Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
"The Discovery of the Molecular Structure of DNA The Double Helix". Nobelprize.org. 15 Aug 2012
http://www.nobelprize.org/educational/medicine/dna_do
uble_helix/readmore.html
Nature Medicine,Volume 12, Number 5, May 2006
26
BÉIR / OREI Personnel
Directrice / Director
Catherine Paquet
cpaquet@uOttawa.ca
Questions générales / General Inquiries
Mélanie Rioux, Research Ethics Coordinator
ethics@uOttawa.ca / 613-562-5387
Responsables d’éthique en recherche / Protocol Officers for Ethics in Research
Germain Zongo
Kim Thompson
Riana Marcotte
gzongo@uOttawa.ca.
Kim.Thompson@uOttawa.ca
Riana.Marcotte@uOttawa.ca
ext. 1379
ext 1783
ext. 1682
27
Faculty of Graduate and
Postdoctoral Studies
Tim Stanley
Vice-Dean, FGPS
vdgrad@uottawa.ca
http://www.grad.uottawa.ca
115 Séraphin Marion St. (Hagen Hall)
Tel: (613) 562-5742
Fax: (613) 562-5992
grad.info@uottawa.ca
28