Effects of Findings of Scientific Misconduct on Postdoctoral Trainees

B. Redman, J. Merz
{"title":"Effects of Findings of Scientific Misconduct on Postdoctoral Trainees","authors":"B. Redman, J. Merz","doi":"10.1080/21507716.2013.804010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: In an earlier study, we described the impact of formal misconduct determinations on established scientists’ careers, showing that many retained scientific careers, and more than half (51%) continued to publish at least one paper per year after their cases were decided. Here, we extend our study to examine the ramifications of final misconduct findings by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) on the careers of postdoctoral fellows. Methods: We tracked publication histories and attempted to track down all postdoctoral trainees found by ORI to have committed misconduct, and attempted to interview them about their experiences. Results: Trainees found to have committed misconduct between 1993 and 2007 whom we could trace were less likely to continue to publish than more established scientists, with only 11% publishing more than one paper per year after their misconduct determinations. Our assessment is constrained by our inability to reliably trace postdoctoral fellows, reflecting the fact that a majority of U.S. postdocs are from other countries. Conclusions: Because of concern about the fairness of severe punishment of trainees, the U.S. Office of Research Integrity appears to be shifting from funding debarments toward requiring education, mentorship, and oversight for trainees, which may enhance the likelihood of rehabilitation. Whether this policy succeeds remains to be seen.","PeriodicalId":89316,"journal":{"name":"AJOB primary research","volume":"24 1","pages":"64 - 67"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJOB primary research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21507716.2013.804010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Background: In an earlier study, we described the impact of formal misconduct determinations on established scientists’ careers, showing that many retained scientific careers, and more than half (51%) continued to publish at least one paper per year after their cases were decided. Here, we extend our study to examine the ramifications of final misconduct findings by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) on the careers of postdoctoral fellows. Methods: We tracked publication histories and attempted to track down all postdoctoral trainees found by ORI to have committed misconduct, and attempted to interview them about their experiences. Results: Trainees found to have committed misconduct between 1993 and 2007 whom we could trace were less likely to continue to publish than more established scientists, with only 11% publishing more than one paper per year after their misconduct determinations. Our assessment is constrained by our inability to reliably trace postdoctoral fellows, reflecting the fact that a majority of U.S. postdocs are from other countries. Conclusions: Because of concern about the fairness of severe punishment of trainees, the U.S. Office of Research Integrity appears to be shifting from funding debarments toward requiring education, mentorship, and oversight for trainees, which may enhance the likelihood of rehabilitation. Whether this policy succeeds remains to be seen.
科研不端行为调查结果对博士后受训者的影响
背景:在早期的一项研究中,我们描述了正式的不当行为裁决对已建立的科学家职业生涯的影响,表明许多人保留了科学事业,超过一半(51%)的人在他们的案件被裁决后继续每年至少发表一篇论文。在这里,我们扩展了我们的研究,以检查研究诚信办公室(ORI)的最终不当行为发现对博士后研究员职业生涯的影响。方法:我们追踪了发表历史,并试图追踪ORI发现的所有有不当行为的博士后学员,并试图采访他们的经历。结果:在1993年至2007年间,我们可以追踪到有不端行为的受训者比更知名的科学家更不可能继续发表论文,只有11%的人在他们的不端行为被确定后每年发表一篇以上的论文。我们的评估受到我们无法可靠地追踪博士后研究员的限制,这反映了大多数美国博士后来自其他国家的事实。结论:考虑到对受训者严厉惩罚的公平性,美国研究诚信办公室似乎正在从资助禁令转向要求对受训者进行教育、指导和监督,这可能会提高受训者康复的可能性。这项政策能否成功还有待观察。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信