Abstract
Institutions receiving federal funding for research from the U.S.Public Health Service need to have policies and procedures to both prevent research misconduct and to adjudicate it when it occurs. The person who is designated to handle research misconduct is typically referred to as the research integrity officer (RIO). In this interview study we report on 79 RIOs who describe how they would handle allegations of research misconduct. Their responses were compared to two expert RIOs. The responses to the allegations in the scenarios demonstrated that RIOs are not uniformly well prepared to handle activities associated with reported allegations of research misconduct. We recommend greater preparation through directed training, use of check lists of possible behaviors necessary to consider when situations arise, being involved in a network of RIOs so one can discuss options, and the possible need to certify RIOs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta- analysis of survey data. PLos ONE, 4(5): 1–11 e5738.
Institute of Medicine. (2002). I Board on health sciences policy (HSP), integrity in scientific research: Creating an environment that promotes responsible conduct. The National Academies Press.
Korenman, S., Berk, R., Wenger, N., & Lew, V. (1998). Evaluation of the research norms of scientists and administrators responsible for academic research integrity. Journal of the American Medical Association, 279, 41–47.
Loui, M. C. (2002). Seven WAYS TO plagiarize: Handling real allegations of research misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics, 8, 529–539.
Michalek, A., Hutson, A., Wicher, C., & Trump, D. L. (2010) The costs and underappreciated consequences of research misconduct: A case study. PLos Medicine, 7(8):529–539, e100318.
National Science Foundation, Part 689, (1987, 1999, 2002) Research Misconduct. http://www.nsf.gov/oig/resmisreg.pdf
ORI (2006) The role of the RIO (http://ori.dhhs.gpv/rio/reovideo).
ORI (2007) The RIO resource (http://rioresource.org/).
PHS: 42 CFR 50, 1989; 42 CFR 93, 2005.
Public Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services, Title 42 Part 50 and Part 93, (1998, 2005) Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct. (http://ori.hhs.gov/documnts/42_cfr_parts_50_and_93_2005.pdf).
Titus, S. L., Wells, J. A., & Rhoades, L. J. (2008). Repairing research integrity. Nature, 453, 980–982.
Wright, D. E., Schneider, P. (2010) Training the research integrity officers (RIO): The federally funded “RIO Boot Camps” backward design to train for the future. Journal of Research Administration, XLI(3):99–112.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The views expressed herein represent those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) , the Department of Health and Human Services, Michigan State University or any component therein or RTI International or any component therein. All authors participated in design analysis and writing of the results. Dr. Bonito directed the US Public Health Service Contract to conduct the study.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bonito, A.J., Titus, S.L. & Wright, D.E. Assessing the Preparedness of Research Integrity Officers (RIOs) to Appropriately Handle Possible Research Misconduct Cases. Sci Eng Ethics 18, 605–619 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9274-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-011-9274-2