The evolution of the "scientific misconduct" issue: An historical overview.

Abstract

Scientific misconduct became a controversial public policy issue in the United States in the 1970s and 1980s when several cases of faked and fabricated research were discovered in prestigious academic institutions and resulted in coverage in the general as well as scientific press. This publicity drew Congressional and federal agency attention to what, until then, had been treated primarily as a matter of institutional or laboratory policy. No scientist had ever condoned such behavior, but most preferred to handle the investigation or resolution internally and quietly, regardless of the source of funding or the prestige or standing of the accused. Once the issue drew public attention, it became quickly clouded by emotion, personality, power-brokering, and politics. There were reiterative debates over what action(s) should be considered "wrong" (and if so, whose rules had been broken and who should investigate) and whether even objective analysis of misconduct might somehow damage the reputation of the research system overall. Scientists, policymakers, philosophers, and lawyers argued over whether "the problem" was that of "a few bad apples" or "a rotten barrel," and some even questioned whether the scientific community should voluntarily cooperate with federal investigations. Fortunately, more objective, measured discussion has replaced the volatile atmosphere of the 1980s and early 1990s. However, the initial reactions of many scientists who purported to speak for all of science, coupled with delays in university investigations and the development of ethics codes, not only resulted in further expansion of the federal regulatory presence on university campuses but also helped to create a situation in which an accusation