Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The American experience: Lessons learned

  • Published:
Science and Engineering Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper discusses ten lessons learned since 1989 about handling allegations of scientific misconduct involving biomedical and behavioral research supported by the U. S. Public Health Service.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. “Responsibility of PHS Awardee and Applicant Institutions for Dealing With and Reporting Possible Misconduct in Science,” 42 C.F.R. Part 50, Subpart A, 54 Federal Register, 32446 (August 8, 1989).

  2. Hallum, J. V. & Hadley, S. W. (1991) OSI: why, what, and how. ASM News 56: 647–650.

    Google Scholar 

  3. ORI Newsletter 6(2): 3 (March 1998).

  4. ORI Newsletter 6(3): 3 (June 1998).

  5. Office of Research Integrity (1999), Scientific Misconduct Investigations, 1993–1997, p. 10.

  6. 42 C.F.R. §50.104 (a) (6)

  7. Office of Research Integrity (1999). Scientific Misconduct Investigations, 1993–1997, p. 6.

  8. 42 C.F.R. §50.105

  9. Lubalin, J.S., Matheson, J.L., & Ardini, M.E. (1996). Survey of Accused but Exonerated Individuals in Research Misconduct Cases, Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, N.C.

    Google Scholar 

  10. National Science Foundation (1990). Survey Data on the Extent of Misconduct in Science and Engineering, Office of Inspector General Oversight Study #90-3214.

  11. National Academy of Sciences (1992). Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process 1: 80–97, National Academy Press, Washington.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Lubalin, J.S. (1995). Consequences of Whistleblowing for the Whistleblower in Misconduct in Science Cases, Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, N.C.

    Google Scholar 

  13. MSU officials criticized for mishandling data dispute (1993). Science 259: 592.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Office of Research Integrity (1998). Study of Inquiry Reports Not Submitted to ORI.

  15. 42 C.F.R. §50.103 (d) (13)

  16. Office of Research Integrity (1995). Guidelines for Institutions and Whistleblowers: Responding to Possible Retaliation against Whistleblowers in Extramural Research.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Policy and Education, Office of Research Integrity, 5515 Security Lane, Suite 700, 20852, Rockville, MD, U.S.A.

    Lawrence J. Rhoades Ph.D. (Director)

Authors
  1. Lawrence J. Rhoades Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of Research Integrity, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or any other federal agency.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rhoades, L.J. The American experience: Lessons learned. SCI ENG ETHICS 6, 95–107 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-000-0028-9

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-000-0028-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation