David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (3) (2008)
We are reporting on how involved the mentor was in promoting responsible research in cases of research misconduct. We reviewed the USPHS misconduct files of the Office of Research Integrity. These files are created by Institutions who prosecute a case of possible research misconduct; ORI has oversight review of these investigations. We explored the role of the mentor in the cases of trainee research misconduct on three specific behaviors that we believe mentors should perform with their trainee: (1) review source data, (2) teach specific research standards and (3) minimize stressful work situations. We found that almost three quarters of the mentors had not reviewed the source data and two thirds had not set standards. These two behaviors are positively correlated. We did not see convincing evidence in the records that mentors were causing stress, but it was apparent in the convicted trainees’ confessions that over 50% experienced some kind of stress. Secondary data, while not created for this research purpose, allows us to look at concrete research behaviors that are otherwise not very researchable. We believe it is important for mentors and institutions to devote more attention to teaching mentors about the process of education and their responsibilities in educating the next generation of scientists. This becomes a critical issue for large research groups who need to determine who is in charge educating, supervising and assuring data integrity.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Dennis J. Moberg & Manuel Velasquez (2004). The Ethics of Mentoring. Business Ethics Quarterly 14 (1):95-122.
Glyn C. Roberts, Maria Kavussanu & Robert L. Sprague (2001). Mentoring and the Impact of the Research Climate. Science and Engineering Ethics 7 (4):525-537.
Chris B. Pascal (1999). The History and Future of the Office of Research Integrity: Scientific Misconduct and Beyond. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):183-198.
Katherine Alfredo & Hillary Hart (2011). The University and the Responsible Conduct of Research: Who is Responsible for What? [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (3):447-457.
John E. Dahlberg & Nancy M. Davidian (2010). Scientific Forensics: How the Office of Research Integrity Can Assist Institutional Investigations of Research Misconduct During Oversight Review. Science and Engineering Ethics 16 (4):713-735.
Barbara Mishkin (1999). Scientific Misconduct: Present Problems and Future Trends. Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):283-292.
Arthur Bonito, Sandra Titus & David Wright (2012). Assessing the Preparedness of Research Integrity Officers (RIOs) to Appropriately Handle Possible Research Misconduct Cases. Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (4):605-619.
Barbara K. Redman, Thomas N. Templin & Jon F. Merz (2006). Research Misconduct Among Clinical Trial Staff. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (3):481-489.
Mark S. Davis, Michelle Riske-Morris & Sebastian R. Diaz (2008). Causal Factors Implicated in Research Misconduct: Evidence From Ori Case Files. [REVIEW] Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (2):395-414.
David E. Wright, Sandra L. Titus & Jered B. Cornelison (2008). Mentoring and Research Misconduct: An Analysis of Research Mentoring in Closed Ori Cases. Science and Engineering Ethics 14 (3):323-336.
Added to index2009-05-04
Total downloads6 ( #218,107 of 1,140,344 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #140,127 of 1,140,344 )
How can I increase my downloads?