Research Misconduct: Understanding Federal Regulations

Research misconduct is a serious allegation that can have significant implications for researchers, institutions, and the public. According to federal regulations in the US, research misconduct refers specifically to fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or when reporting results. Fabrication involves making up and recording data or results without conducting the relevant research, while falsification entails manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes to misrepresent the research record. Plagiarism is defined as appropriating another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without proper attribution. Federal policy assumes that researchers and institutions are primarily responsible for reporting and investigating misconduct, with government agencies such as the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) becoming involved in certain cases, particularly when public health, safety, or federal interests are at risk. Administrative actions taken in response to misconduct can include correcting the research record, issuing letters of reprimand, suspending or terminating awards, and implementing certification requirements to ensure future compliance.

Explore related products

Research Ethics in the Life Sciences

$18.95 $18.95

The Routledge Handbook of Anti-Corruption Research and Practice (Routledge International Handbooks)

$240 $300

Law and the Regulation of Scientific Research: Trusting Experts (Law, Science and Society)

$54.99 $54.99

University Responsibility for the Adjudication of Research Misconduct: The Science Bubble

$99 $109.99

Healthcare Research Ethics and Law: Regulation, Review and Responsibility (Biomedical Law and Ethics Library)

$200 $68.99

The Legal Aspects of Industrial Hygiene and Safety (Sustainable Improvements in Environment Safety and Health)

$250 $120

Fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism

Fabrication is the act of making up data or results and recording or reporting them without having performed the relevant research. In other words, it involves generating and presenting data without conducting the necessary experiments or studies. Fabrication also includes the fabrication of research proposals, methodologies, and other research-related documents. For example, if a researcher claims to have collected data from a particular experiment that never took place, that would be considered fabrication.

Falsification, on the other hand, involves manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes or changing or omitting data to mislead or distort the research record. This can include selectively reporting only favourable results, altering data to make them conform to expectations or theories, or manipulating research methods to influence the outcomes. For instance, if a researcher modifies the research methodology section of a paper to conceal a flaw in the experiment, that would fall under falsification.

Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit. It involves passing off someone else's intellectual property as one's own. Plagiarism can take many forms, including copying or paraphrasing text, data, or ideas without proper attribution, using another person's creative work without permission, or failing to acknowledge the contributions of collaborators or colleagues. For example, if a researcher copies text from another paper and presents it as their own work without proper citation, it would constitute plagiarism.

It is important to note that not all forms of misconduct fall under the federal definition of research misconduct. The definition specifically excludes honest errors or differences of opinion. Additionally, it is limited to well-documented, serious departures from accepted research practices and does not encompass criminal behaviour, personal disputes, or violations of grant management policies.

Intentional, knowing, or reckless behaviour

Research misconduct is a serious matter, and federal regulations outline specific criteria to define and address such behaviour. According to federal policy, research misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, as well as in reporting research results.

Fabrication involves making up data or results and recording or reporting them without having performed the relevant research. This means generating fictional data and presenting it as if it were genuine, which is a clear and intentional departure from ethical and professional norms. For instance, a researcher might fabricate data to support a desired conclusion or to fill in gaps in their research.

Falsification, another form of intentional misconduct, involves manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes to misrepresent the research. This can include changing or omitting data points to lead to a misleading conclusion. For example, a researcher might selectively remove data points that contradict their desired outcome, intentionally distorting the research record.

Plagiarism, the third category of research misconduct, is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit. While norms for attribution may vary across different fields, intentional plagiarism involves knowingly failing to provide proper credit or attempting to pass off another's work as one's own. This behaviour demonstrates a reckless disregard for intellectual property and academic integrity.

In summary, intentional, knowing, or reckless behaviour in research misconduct refers to deliberate actions that deviate from accepted practices. This includes fabrication of data, falsification of records, and plagiarism of others' work. Federal agencies consider the severity and impact of such misconduct when determining administrative actions, ensuring the integrity and ethical standards of the research community.

Deviation from ethical, legal, or professional norms

Fabrication involves making up data or results and recording or reporting them without having performed the relevant research. This means that research findings are discussed, shared, or published despite the absence of genuine work. Falsification, on the other hand, involves manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data to misrepresent the research in the research record. This can include selectively eliminating data points to generate misleading conclusions. Plagiarism, the third form of research misconduct, is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit. Norms for attribution may vary across different fields, so researchers must be diligent in familiarizing themselves with relevant citation conventions.

It is important to note that not all deviations from ethical, legal, or professional norms constitute research misconduct. For example, honest errors or differences of opinion are not considered research misconduct. Additionally, the federal definition of research misconduct does not encompass criminal behaviour, personal disputes, violations of grant management policies, or other unacceptable behaviours not unique to research, such as discrimination or harassment.

When determining whether an action constitutes a deviation from ethical, legal, or professional norms, researchers must carefully assess whether the suspected incident of misconduct is genuine and not a result of misunderstanding or personal conflict. Allegations of research misconduct are serious matters and should be reserved for situations where evidence indicates a clear departure from accepted practices. Researchers are expected to take misconduct seriously and report apparent misconduct by other researchers, as self-regulation within the research profession is crucial.

In terms of consequences, federal agencies that conduct or support research are responsible for implementing policies to address research misconduct. These agencies may take administrative actions such as correcting the research record, issuing letters of reprimand, imposing special certification requirements, suspending or terminating awards, or suspension and debarment. The specific actions taken will depend on the seriousness of the misconduct, including factors such as the degree of intentionality, its impact on the research record, and its effects on research subjects, other researchers, institutions, or public welfare.

Explore related products

Federal Sentencing Guidelines Manual; 2020-2021 Edition: With inside-cover quick-reference sentencing table

$74.99

Federal Sentencing Guidelines Manual; 2019-2020 Edition: With inside-cover quick-reference sentencing table

$79.99

FEDERAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES MANUAL ANNOTATED 2022 EDITION: WEST HARTFORD LEGAL PUBLISHING

$9.99 $40

Misconduct

$12.99 $19

Misconduct

$3.79

Misconduct (Blu-ray + DVD)

$9.59 $15.95

Retaliation and protection for those reporting

Federal research misconduct policy assumes that researchers and research institutions bear the primary responsibility for reporting and investigating allegations of misconduct. This policy is designed to provide safeguards for subjects of allegations as well as for informants.

The policy outlines that research institutions will notify the funding agency of an allegation of research misconduct if the allegation involves federally funded research and meets the Federal definition of research misconduct. This definition includes fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.

To be considered research misconduct, actions must represent a "significant departure from accepted practices", be “committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly”, and be “proven by a preponderance of evidence”. The Federal Government's role in research misconduct is limited to these well-documented, serious departures from accepted research practices.

In deciding what administrative actions are appropriate, agencies should consider the seriousness of the misconduct, including the degree to which it was intentional or reckless, whether it was an isolated event or part of a pattern, and its impact on the research record, research subjects, other researchers, institutions, or public welfare. Administrative actions can include correcting the research record, letters of reprimand, imposing special certification or assurance requirements, suspension or termination of an active award, or suspension and debarment.

To encourage reporting, safeguards for informants are put in place to give individuals the confidence to bring allegations of research misconduct made in good faith without suffering retribution. These safeguards include protection against retaliation for informants who make good faith allegations, fair and objective procedures for the examination and resolution of allegations, and diligence in implementing final administrative actions.

The Office of Research Integrity (ORI) and the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) provide guidelines for fair and timely procedures to assist agencies and research institutions in responding to allegations of research misconduct. These guidelines emphasize the protection of informants and subjects involved in inquiries or investigations, maintaining confidentiality to the extent possible, and taking steps to safeguard evidence and protect the rights of those involved.

Administrative actions and appeals

Federal agencies, such as the Office of Research Integrity (ORI), play a crucial role in coordinating responses when multiple agencies are involved in funding activities related to the allegation. These agencies have the authority to implement administrative actions in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. The administrative actions taken depend on the seriousness of the misconduct, including factors such as the degree of intentionality, its impact on the research record, and its effect on the public welfare.

Available administrative actions include, but are not limited to, correcting the research record, issuing letters of reprimand, imposing special certification or assurance requirements, suspending or terminating awards, and suspension and debarment as per government-wide rules. In cases where suspension or debarment is enforced, this information is made publicly available through the List of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement.

The process also allows for appeals against agency findings of research misconduct and administrative actions. These appeals follow the agency's applicable procedures, maintaining separation from the inquiry and investigation phases. The subjects of allegations are informed of the outcome, and the institution is notified of the agency's disposition of the case. To ensure fairness, confidentiality is maintained, and safeguards are provided to protect individuals who bring forward allegations of research misconduct in good faith.

Frequently asked questions