The 2017 National Academies report Fostering Integrity in Resarch provides an excellent “past-present-future” overview of the topic. Here is a 10-page summary that includes recommendations for the future.
Of particular interest in the report is the discussion of the various research misconduct definitions that have been implemented by funding agencies and universities. These policies invariably include the “FFP Standard” adopted in 2000 by the Office of Science and Technology:
Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.
Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.
Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.
Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.
Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.
University of Pennsylvania
Research Misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other serious deviation from accepted practices in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.
Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.
Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.
Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, or results, or works without giving appropriate credit.
Serious deviation from accepted practices includes but is not limited to stealing, destroying, or damaging the research property of others with the intent to alter the research record; and directing or encouraging others to engage in fabrication, falsification or plagiarism. As defined here, it is limited to activity related to the proposing, performing, or reviewing of research, or in the reporting of research results.
Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.
Stanford
“Research misconduct” is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.
- Fabrication means making up data or results, and recording or reporting them.
- Falsification means manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.
- Plagiarism means the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.
Research misconduct does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of data.
A finding of research misconduct requires that:
- there is a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community
- the misconduct is committed intentionally, or knowingly, or recklessly
- the allegation is proven by a preponderance of the evidence. (Stanford University’s disciplinary procedures may establish a different standard of proof for disciplinary actions.)
This policy addresses only research misconduct. Stanford’s statement on faculty discipline has been interpreted to include such other misdeeds as reckless disregard for accuracy, failure to supervise adequately, and other lapses from professional conduct or neglect of academic duties. Findings (pursuant to this research misconduct procedure) of serious academic deficiencies in proposing, conducting or reporting research – but not constituting research misconduct – are to be addressed by the cognizant dean, or by initiating the relevant disciplinary process, as appropriate. Allegations or suspicions of misconduct outside the scope of this policy should be referred for investigation to the cognizant dean, vice provost or vice president; the process of investigation and reporting obligations may differ from those required for research misconduct cases.
Johns Hopkins
Falsification, fabrication or plagiarism in the proposing, performing, reviewing or reporting of research.
Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.
Each of the following must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence to support a finding of research misconduct:
a. There has been a significant departure from the accepted practices of the scientific community; and
b. The misconduct was committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly.
Harvard
Princeton
Columbia
University of Michigan
MIT
