Using Criminalization and Due Process to Reduce Scientific Misconduct

The issue of how to best minimize scientific misconduct remains a controversial topic among bioethicists, professors, policymakers, and attorneys. This paper suggests that harsher criminal sanctions against misconduct, better protections for whistleblowers, and the creation of due process standards for misconduct investigations are urgently needed. Although the causes of misconduct and estimates of problem remain varied, the literature suggests that scientific misconduct—fraud, fabrication, and plagiarism of scientific research—continues to damage public health and trust in science. Providing stricter criminal statutes against misconduct is necessary to motivate whistleblowers and deter wrongdoers, and the provision of basic due process protections is necessary for ensuring a fair and balanced misconduct investigation.     

Generalizing on Best Practices in Image Processing: A Model for Promoting Research Integrity

Modifying images for scientific publication is now quick and easy due to changes in technology. This has created a need for new image processing guidelines and attitudes, such as those offered to the research community by Doug Cromey (Cromey 2010). We suggest that related changes in technology have simplified the task of detecting misconduct for journal editors as well as researchers, and that this simplification has caused a shift in the responsibility for reporting misconduct. We also argue that the concept of best practices in image processing can serve as a general model for education in best practices in research.     

Image Manipulation as Research Misconduct

A growing number of research misconduct cases handled by the Office of Research Integrity involve image manipulations. Manipulations may include simple image enhancements, misrepresenting an image as something different from what it is, and altering specific features of an image. Through a study of specific cases, the misconduct findings associated with image manipulation, detection methods and those likely to identify such manipulations, are discussed. This article explores sanctions imposed against guilty researchers and the factors that resulted in no misconduct finding although relevant images clearly were flawed. Although new detection tools are available for universities and journals to detect questionable images, this article explores why these tools have not been embraced.

Academic Misconduct among Business Students: A Comparison of the US and UAE

A survey of 345 undergraduate business students from a medium-sized southeastern regional university and 164 undergraduates from a medium-sized university in the United Arab Emirates found that 71 % of all respondents admitted to academic misconduct in a recent 1-year period, a percentage similar to McCabe’s (2005) finding that an average of 70 % of undergraduate students admitted to recent academic misconduct. Business students from the Middle East were significantly less likely to perceive various academic misconduct behaviors as forms of serious cheating compared to business students from the US. Hofstede’s (2001) cultural dimension of individualism/collectivism and Ajzen’s (Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50, 179–211, 1991) theory of planned behavior are discussed as likely explanations of reported academic misconduct differences between the two countries.     

A case for methodological overhaul and increased study of executive function in the domestic dog (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Canis lupus familiaris</Emphasis>)

Executive function (EF) allows for self-regulation of behavior including maintaining focus in the face of distraction, inhibiting behavior that is suboptimal or inappropriate in a given context, and updating the contents of working memory. While EF has been studied extensively in humans, it has only recently become a topic of research in the domestic dog. In this paper, I argue for increased study of dog EF by explaining how it might influence the owner–dog bond, human safety, and dog welfare, as well as reviewing the current literature dedicated to EF in dogs. In “EF and its Application to “Man’s Best Friend” section, I briefly describe EF and how it is relevant to dog behavior. In “Previous investigations into EF in dogs” section, I provide a review of the literature pertaining to EF in dogs, specifically tasks used to assess abilities like inhibitory control, cognitive flexibility, and working memory capacity. In “Insights and limitations of previous studies” section, I consider limitations of existing studies that must be addressed in future research. Finally, in “Future directions” section, I propose future directions for meaningful research on EF in dogs.     

Scientific societies and whistleblowers: the relationship between the community and the individual

Formalizing shared ethical standards is an activity of scientific societies designed to achieve a collective goal of promoting ethical conduct. A scientist who is faced with the choice of becoming a “whistleblower” by exposing misconduct does so in the context of these ethical standards. Examination of ethics policies of scientific societies which are members of the Council of Scientific Society Presidents (CSSP) shows a breadth of purpose and scope in these policies. Among the CSSP member societies, some ethics policies chiefly present the ethical culture of the community in an educational context and do not have enforcement procedures. Other policies are more comprehensive and include standards for certification, procedures for addressing ethical issues, and established sanctions. Of the 36 member societies of CSSP that have developed a code or adopted a code of another professional society, 18 specifically identified a responsibility to expose ethical misconduct, demonstrating an acknowledgment of the possible critical role of the whistleblower in addressing ethical issues. Scientific societies may revise their ethics codes based upon experience gained in addressing cases of ethical misconduct. In most cases, the action of a whistleblower is the initial step in addressing an ethics violation; the whistleblower may either be in the position of an observer or a victim, such as in the case of someone who discovers that his or her own work has been plagiarized. The ethics committee of a scientific society is one of several possible outlets through which the whistleblower can voice a complaint or concern. Ethical violations can include falsification, fabrication, plagiarism and other authorship disputes, conflict of interest and other serious violations. Commonly, some of these violations may involve publication in the scientific literature. Thus addressing ethical issues may be intertwined with a scientific society’s role in the dissemination of new scientific results. For a journal published by a scientific society, the editor can refer at some point to the ethics committee of the society. Whereas, in the case of a journal published by a commercial publisher, the editor may be without direct support of the associated scientific community in handling the case. The association of a journal with a scientific society may thus direct a whistleblower towards addressing the issue within the scientific community rather than involving the press or talking to colleagues who may gossip. A formal procedure for handling ethics cases may also discourage false accusers. Another advantage of handling complaints through ethics committees is that decisions to contact home institutions or funding agencies can be made by the ethics committee and are not the responsibility of the whistleblower or the editor of the journal. The general assessment is that the establishment of ethics policies, especially policies covering publication in society journals, will promote a culture supportive of whistleblowers and discouraging to false accusers. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the symposium entitled “Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t: What the Scientific Community Can Do About Whistleblowing” held during the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Seattle, Washington, 15 February, 1997.     

Do Birds of a Feather Cheat Together? How Personality and Relationships Affect Student Cheating

Academic misconduct is widespread in schools, colleges, and universities and it appears to be an international phenomenon that also spills over into the workplace (Nonis and Swift 2001; Sims 1993; Stone et al. 2011). To this end, while a great deal of research has investigated various individual components such as, demographic, personality and situational factors that contribute to cheating, research has yet to examine why students help others cheat and which students are being asked to help others cheat. In this study, we investigated if the closeness of the relationship to the individual requesting help in cheating to the individual being asked to help cheat, influenced the decision to help cheat. We also investigated if past cheating behavior predicted how an individual would respond to requests to cheat. Additionally, we sought to answer the following questions; whether minor cheating is more prevalent than serious cheating, what personality factors predict helping others cheat, who is helped, and how people rationalize helping others cheat. Results indicate minor cheating to be more prevalent, prudent personalities are less likely to have cheated or to help others cheat, individuals are more likely to help friends cheat than to help strangers, and past cheating behaviors is indicative of helping others to cheat. Implications for research and practice are discussed.     

Scientists Still Behaving Badly? A Survey Within Industry and Universities

Little is known about research misconduct within industry and how it compares to universities, even though a lot of biomedical research is performed by–or in collaboration with–commercial entities. Therefore, we sent an e-mail invitation to participate in an anonymous computer-based survey to all university researchers having received a biomedical research grant or scholarship from one of the two national academic research funders of Belgium between 2010 and 2014, and to researchers working in large biomedical companies or spin-offs in Belgium. The validated survey included questions about various types of research misconduct committed by respondents themselves and observed among their colleagues in the last three years. Prevalences of misconduct were compared between university and industry respondents using binary logistic regression models, with adjustments for relevant personal characteristics, and with significance being accepted for p < 0.01. The survey was sent to 1766 people within universities and an estimated 255 people from industry. Response rates were 43 (767/1766) and 48% (123/255), and usable information was available for 617 and 100 respondents, respectively. In general, research misconduct was less likely to be reported by industry respondents compared to university respondents. Significant differences were apparent for one admitted action (gift authorship) and three observed actions (plagiarism, gift authorship, and circumventing animal-subjects research requirements), always with lower prevalences for industry compared to universities, except for plagiarism. This survey, based on anonymous self-report, shows that research misconduct occurs to a substantial degree among biomedical researchers from both industry and universities.     

Coping with transphobia in employment: Strategies used by transgender and gender-diverse people in the United States

Background: Transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) individuals face stigma in the general public and in the workplace. Research has suggested that TGD individuals may demonstrate unique coping strategies in the workplace in order to manage transphobia in that setting; however, further research is needed to identify the specific strategies that transgender individuals use to deal with transphobia at work.

Method: The present qualitative study utilized the grounded theory methodology to identify the specific coping strategies utilized to deal with transphobia at work. Participants included 45 TGD participants from the northeastern United States.

Results: The results of the study include the identification of eight coping-strategy themes including gender-presentation strategies, gender detachment, relationship navigating, resource utilization, job-performance strategies, maladaptive coping strategies, structural strategies, and power-acquisition strategies.

Conclusions: Implications of the present study suggest the resilience and diverse coping strategies that mental health providers can help TGD workers draw from in dealing with transphobia at work. In addition, there is a need for greater remediation and prevention of employment-related transphobia, including leadership within employment settings, greater legal protections, and enforcement of these laws in the United States.     

Context effects on the judgment of basic emotions in the face

This article reports on three experiments on the controversial topic of context effects in the judgment of emotion from the face. In Experiment 1 (N=169) subjects were shown either a happy, sad, or angry anchor face as context followed by a target slide of a neutral face. In Experiment 2 (N=119) subjects were shown an anchor of a happy or angry face as context and a sad face as target. In Experiment 3 (N=180) subjects were shown an anchor of a happy, sad, or surprised face as context and an angry face as target. All experiments used facial expressions from Ekman and Friesen'sPictures of Facial Affect (1976). Dependent measures included intensity ratings of pleasure and arousal dimensions (Mehrabian & Russell, 1974); a judgment of the intensity of six specific emotions expressed (happy, sad, angry, afraid, disgusted, and interested); and categorical judgments of emotions. Significant context effects were observed for the neutral target and, with smaller effects, for the angry and sad targets on dimensional and intensity ratings. The magnitude of the context effect depended on both the target and anchor facial expressions. Greater categorical agreement of emotion was obtained for the target when another face was provided as a context than when the target face was shown alone. These results provide an independent replication and extension of recent research (Russell, 1991; Russell & Fehr, 1987) on the relativity of facial affect judgment.This research was supported by the Faculty Development Grant from Hofstra University to the first author.     

Using criminalization and due process to reduce scientific misconduct

The issue of how to best minimize scientific misconduct remains a controversial topic among bioethicists, professors, policymakers, and attorneys. This paper suggests that harsher criminal sanctions against misconduct, better protections for whistleblowers, and the creation of due process standards for misconduct investigations are urgently needed. Although the causes of misconduct and estimates of problem remain varied, the literature suggests that scientific misconduct-fraud, fabrication, and plagiarism of scientific research-continues to damage public health and trust in science. Providing stricter criminal statutes against misconduct is necessary to motivate whistleblowers and deter wrongdoers, and the provision of basic due process protections is necessary for ensuring a fair and balanced misconduct investigation.     

The ombudsman for research practice

We propose that institutions consider establishing a position of “Ombudsman for Research Practice”. This person would assume several roles: as asounding board to those needing confidential consultation about research issues — basic, applied or clinical; as afacilitator for those wishing to pursue a formal grievance process; and as aneducator to distribute guidelines and standards, to raise the consciousness regarding sloppy or irregular practices in order to prevent misconduct and to promote the responsible conduct of research. While there are compelling features to this position, many complex issues need to be considered and resolved. We invite readers to respond to questions we raise in the text.     

Sustained conscious access to incidental memories in RSVP

In visual search of natural scenes, differentiation of briefly fixated but task-irrelevant distractor items from incidental memory is often comparable to explicit memorization. However, many characteristics of incidental memory remain unclear, including the capacity for its conscious retrieval. Here, we examined incidental memory for faces in either upright or inverted orientation using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation (RSVP). Subjects were instructed to detect a target face in a sequence of 8–15 faces cropped from natural scene photographs (Experiment 1). If the target face was identified within a brief time window, the subject proceeded to an incidental memory task. Here, subjects used incidental memory to discriminate between a probe face (a distractor in the RSVP stream) and a novel, foil face. In Experiment 2 we reduced scene-related semantic coherency by intermixing faces from multiple scenes and contrasted incidental memory with explicit memory, a condition where subjects actively memorized each face from the sequence without searching for a target. In both experiments, we measured objective performance (Type 1 AUC) and metacognitive accuracy (Type 2 AUC), revealing sustained and consciously accessible incidental memory for upright and inverted faces. In novel analyses of face categories, we examined whether accuracy or metacognitive judgments are affected by shared semantic features (i.e., similarity in gender, race, age). Similarity enhanced the accuracy of incidental memory discriminations but did not influence metacognition. We conclude that incidental memory is sustained and consciously accessible, is not reliant on scene contexts, and is not enhanced by explicit memorization.     

Disrupted Face Processing in Frontotemporal Dementia: A Review of the Clinical and Neuroanatomical Evidence

Faces play an integral role in day-to-day functioning, particularly for social interactions where dynamic and rapid processing of information is vital. Analysis of faces allows an individual to ascertain a wide range of information including deciphering mood and identity, with these assessments directing an individual’s subsequent response and behaviours. The prominent social and emotional deficits observed in frontotemporal dementia (FTD), a younger-onset dementia syndrome, may in part reflect a breakdown of the face processing network. Different subtypes of FTD present with divergent patterns of atrophy, although damage is predominantly confined to the frontal and temporal lobes. Specific predictions regarding the role of frontal and temporal regions in face processing have been proposed in the model outlined by Haxby et al. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(6), 223–233 (2000). This model presents a parsimonious method by which to understand face processing in FTD while concurrently allowing assessment of the predictive value and applicability of such a model. By applying the Haxby model to the existing FTD literature, this review presents both direct and indirect evidence of a breakdown in key elements of the face processing network. The type and degree of breakdown appears to differ as a function of FTD subtype and associated brain atrophy. The evidence presented in this review and its relationship with predictions of the Haxby model provides impetus and direction for future research investigating face processing in FTD.     

Evaluation by Citation: Trends in Publication Behavior,Evaluation Criteria,and the Strive for High Impact Publications

Criteria for the evaluation of most scholars’ work have recently received wider attention due to high-profile cases of scientific misconduct which are perceived to be linked to these criteria. However, in the competition for career advancement and funding opportunities almost all scholars are subjected to the same criteria. Therefore these evaluation criteria act as ‘switchmen’, determining the tracks along which scholarly work is pushed by the dynamic interplay of interests of both scholars and their institutions. Currently one of the most important criteria is the impact of publications. In this research, the extent to which publish or perish, a long standing evaluation criterion, led to scientific misconduct is examined briefly. After this the strive for high impact publications will be examined, firstly by identifying the period in which this became an important evaluation criterion, secondly by looking at variables contributing to the impact of scholarly papers by means of a non-structured literature study, and lastly by combining these data into a quantitative analysis.     

The ethics of animal research: a survey of pediatric health care workers

Introduction

Pediatric health care workers (HCW) often perform, promote, and advocate use of public funds for animal research (AR). We aim to determine whether HCW consider common arguments (and counterarguments) in support (or not) of AR convincing.

Design

After development and validation, an e-mail survey was sent to all pediatricians and pediatric intensive care unit nurses and respiratory therapists (RTs) affiliated with a Canadian University. We presented questions about demographics, support for AR, and common arguments (with their counterarguments) to justify the moral permissibility (or not) of AR. Responses are reported using standard tabulations. Responses of pediatricians and nurses/RTs were compared using Chi-square, with P?<?.05 considered significant.

Results

Response rate was 53/115(46%) (pediatricians), and 73/120(61%) (nurses/RTs). Pediatricians and nurses/RTs are supportive of AR. Most considered ‘benefits arguments’ sufficient to justify AR; however, most acknowledged that counterarguments suggesting alternative research methods may be available, or that it is unclear why the same ‘benefits arguments’ do not apply to using humans in research, significantly weakened ‘benefits arguments’. Almost all were not convinced of the moral permissibility of AR by ‘characteristics of non-human-animals arguments’, including that non-human-animals may not be sentient, or are simply property. Most were not convinced of the moral permissibility of AR by ‘human exceptionalism’ arguments, including that humans have more advanced mental abilities, are of a special ‘kind’, can enter into social contracts, or face a ‘lifeboat situation’. Counterarguments explained much of this, including that not all humans have these more advanced abilities [the argument from species overlap], and that the notion of ‘kind’ is arbitrary [e.g., why are we not of the kind ‘sentient animal’ or ‘subject-of-a-life’]. Pediatrician and nurse/RT responses were similar.

Conclusions

Most respondents were not convinced of the moral permissibility of AR when given common arguments and counterarguments from the literature. HCW should seriously consider arguments on both sides of the AR debate.

     

Automatic identification of familiar faces

Much research has suggested that facial identification has some characteristics of automaticity, in that it is rapid, nonconscious, and mandatory. However, little research has tested whether it can occur even if attention is already devoted to the demanding central processes of another task. In the present study, we addressed this type of automaticity using the psychological refractory period paradigm. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants successfully identified familiar faces, even while they were engaged with another task, indicating the automaticity of familiar-face identification. In Experiments 3 and 4, however, participants could not identify unfamiliar faces as automatically as they could identify the familiar faces. We concluded that automatic face identification is possible, but dependent on prior familiarity.     

Working with Research Integrity—Guidance for Research Performing Organisations: The Bonn PRINTEGER Statement

This document presents the Bonn PRINTEGER Consensus Statement: Working with Research Integrity—Guidance for research performing organisations. The aim of the statement is to complement existing instruments by focusing specifically on institutional responsibilities for strengthening integrity. It takes into account the daily challenges and organisational contexts of most researchers. The statement intends to make research integrity challenges recognisable from the work-floor perspective, providing concrete advice on organisational measures to strengthen integrity. The statement, which was concluded February 7th 2018, provides guidance on the following key issues:

1. § 1.
   Providing information about research integrity
    
2. § 2.
   Providing education, training and mentoring
    
3. § 3.
   Strengthening a research integrity culture
    
4. § 4.
   Facilitating open dialogue
    
5. § 5.
   Wise incentive management
    
6. § 6.
   Implementing quality assurance procedures
    
7. § 7.
   Improving the work environment and work satisfaction
    
8. § 8.
   Increasing transparency of misconduct cases
    
9. § 9.
   Opening up research
    
10. § 10.
    Implementing safe and effective whistle-blowing channels
     
11. § 11.
    Protecting the alleged perpetrators
     
12. § 12.
    Establishing a research integrity committee and appointing an ombudsperson
     
13. § 13.
    Making explicit the applicable standards for research integrity
     

     

The development of “face-space” in infancy

Valentine (1991 Valentine, T. 1991. A unified account of the effects of distinctiveness, inversion, and race in face recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43A: 161–204. [Taylor & Francis Online] , [Google Scholar]) proposed that faces are encoded in a multidimensional “face-space”. Here, we apply this framework to the development of face processing in infancy. It is thought that faces are encoded as “regions” in the face-space, such that variations in the face input are recognized as the same face identity. In a set of studies with 4-month-olds, 7-month-olds, and adults, we addressed the question of how these “identity regions” develop. The findings indicated that they are initially broad and become narrowed with development. Our results suggest that the face-space model can usefully be applied to face processing in infancy.     

Exploring the role of characteristic motion when learning new faces

Previous research has shown that it is easier to recognize familiar faces when shown moving, rather than static, especially when viewing conditions are difficult (Knight & Johnston, 1997 Knight, B. and Johnston, A. 1997. The role of movement in face recognition. Visual Cognition, 4: 265–273. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]; Lander, Christie, & Bruce, 1999 Bruce, V., Henderson, Z., Greenwood, K., Hancock, P. J. B., Burton, A. M. and Miller, P. 1999. Verification of face identities from images captured on video. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 5: 339–360. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). One possible theoretical reason for the moving-face advantage is that we learn “characteristic motion signatures” for familiar faces, associated with the face representation in memory. To examine this idea we investigated the role of motion at test when learning faces from either static images or moving sequences (Experiment 1). Results suggest that there is only an advantage for motion at test when the face is learned moving. In Experiment 2 we map the importance of facial motion as a face becomes increasingly familiar, on a television drama. We demonstrate that the beneficial effect of motion is not dependent on the amount of time the face is viewed. Results from both experiments support the idea of rapidly learned characteristic motion patterns.