Research Misconduct - Definitions and Process

Definitions

Open All Tabs
  • RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

    • Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.
    • Honest error and differences of opinion do not research misconduct.

  • FABRICATION

    • Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.
    • Fabrication occurs when false data is incorporated into the official study notebook, submitted to a funding agency, or publicly disseminated through the process of publication, patent application, or at a public forum such as a professional meeting, seminar, or symposium, regardless of whether the data is subsequently published or not.
    • Some examples include:
      • Completing a questionnaire for a fictitious subject that was never interviewed. Refer to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Research Integrity’s site: Can Survey Research Staff Commit Research Misconduct?
      • Creating a data set for an experiment that was never actually conducted
      • Reuse of western blots or other experimental data
      • Adding fictitious data to a real data set collected during an actual experiment for the purpose of providing additional statistical validity
      • Inserting a clinical note into the research record to indicate compliance with an element of the protocol 

  • FALSIFICATION

    • 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.
    • Some examples include:
      • Altering data to render a modification of the variances in the data
      • Falsifying dates and experimental procedures in the study notebook
      • Misrepresenting results from statistical analysis
      • Misrepresenting the methods of an experiment such as the model (e.g., cell line) used to conduct the experiment
      • Falsifying the times that blood samples were drawn from human subjects

  • PLAGIARISM

    • Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.
    • Authorship disputes are not within the definition of plagiarism.  Please go to the “Authorship & Peer Review” Tab for more information.
    • Some examples include:
      • Copying verbatim text without proper attribution
      • Intentionally failing to cite someone else’s work, to claim that the ideas and words belong to you

  • ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

Process

1. Allegations Received

The process for reviewing allegations is as follows: 

Allegation means a disclosure of possible research misconduct through any means of The disclosure may be by written or oral statement or other communication to an institutional official. Allegations of misconduct should normally be directed to the VPRS or designee. Others who receive an allegation of misconduct should immediately forward it to the VPRS.

2. Assessment Stage

The VPRS will request an assessment by her designees of all allegations to determine if an inquiry is warranted.

Assessment Standard - An inquiry is warranted if the VPRS determines that the allegation: (1) falls within the definition of research misconduct; and (2) is sufficiently credible and specific so that potential evidence of possible research misconduct may be identified.

3. Inquiry Stage

An inquiry is an information gathering and initial fact finding process to determine if a formal investigation of misconduct should be The inquiry review may be conducted by the RIO or designated institutional official (collectively, “the RIO”) with the caveat that if needed, these individuals may utilize one or more subject matter experts to assist them in the inquiry.

Inquiry Standard - An investigation is warranted if there is:(1) a reasonable basis for concluding that the allegation falls within the definition of research misconduct; and (2) preliminary information-gathering and preliminary fact-finding from the inquiry indicates that the allegation may have substance’

4. Investigation Stage

If findings from the inquiry provide a sufficient basis for conducting an investigation, the VPRS will initiate an investigation within 30 days following receipt of the Inquiry report. An investigation means the formal development of a factual record and the examination of that record leading to a decision either to make a finding that research misconduct was not shown or to recommend a finding of research misconduct; the latter finding may include a recommendation for appropriate actions, including administrative actions.


Investigation Standard – A finding of research misconduct requires a determination by the Committee by an eighty percent (80%) majority vote that:(1) there was a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community;(2) the misconduct was committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly; and (3) the allegation was proven by a preponderance of the evidence.

Top