Scientific controversies, from problems replicating results — such as with the now debunked association between autism and MMR vaccines — to researcher misconduct and sensationalism, have led to speculation of “trouble at the lab” as the Economist put it.
To address the issue, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the Annenberg Retreat at Sunnylands recently convened top scientists from Carnegie Mellon University, the University of California, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Georgia Institute of Technology and other leading institutions to examine ways to return to high scientific standards. In an opinion piece published in Science, the group outlines what can be done to better ensure research integrity.
Attempting to do so begins with acknowledging and addressing the problems that exist at every level, from the notion that science is self-correcting to academia’s incentive structures that encourage researchers to publish novel, positive results, to the greater opportunities open-access and other platforms provide to publish less-scrutinized studies. In addition, a lack of data sharing leads to the inability to replicate results, universities that want to make headlines exaggerate findings, and the media’s quest for ratings and readership often trumps quality reporting.
“Science is littered with irreproducible results, even from top places, and it’s a widespread problem that looks different in different domains, but there are shared commonalities,” said CMU’s Stephen E. Fienberg (pictured right), the Maurice Faulk University Professor of Statistics and Social Sciences. “As a statistician, I understand how the role of data is critical. But determining how to set a policy to support data access is very complicated — there is not a simple set of rules.”
The NAS and Annenberg group identified several ways to change incentives for quality and correction, including rewarding researchers for publishing high-quality work rather than publishing work more often; mentoring young peer-reviewers to increase clarity and quality of editorial responses during the journal publishing process; and using “voluntary withdrawal” and “withdrawal for cause” instead of the blanket “retraction” term, which has negative connotations that can prevent some researchers from taking action when a paper is wrong, but not as a result of fraud or misconduct.
“We all have a responsibility if we want science to work — academic institutions, scientific associations, journals, authors, university public relations officers and the press — people need to be trained all the way up the line.”
Because ensuring scientific integrity is the responsibility of many stakeholders, the group recommends that the National Academy of Sciences’ call for an independent Scientific Integrity Advisory Board in 1992 should be revisited. The board’s goal would be to address ethical issues in research conduct.
Additionally, universities should insist that their faculty and students are educated in research ethics; that their publications do not feature honorary or ghost authors; that public information officers avoid hype in publicizing findings; and suspect research is promptly and thoroughly investigated.
The Latest on: Research Integrity
via Google News
The Latest on: Research Integrity
- Journals Investigate Possible Misconduct in Heart Researchon September 13, 2022 at 11:47 am
Scientific publishers get involved in a scandal at Temple University that has so far produced one retraction for image manipulation, a university-led investigation, and a lawsuit by one of the ...
- Exclusive: Medical journals broaden inquiry into potential heart research misconducton September 13, 2022 at 6:19 am
Three medical journals recently launched independent investigations of possible data manipulation in heart studies led by Temple University researchers.
- New project to improve biomedical citation accuracy and integrityon September 11, 2022 at 5:00 pm
A new project led by Associate Professor Halil Kilicoglu and Associate Professor Jodi Schneider in the School of Information Sciences at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign will assist ...
- Research integrity and Peer Review Excellence at IOP Publishingon August 24, 2022 at 5:00 pm
The peer review process remains the bastion of research integrity, and in this special IOP Peer Review Excellence webinar, we’ll give you an introduction to what we do at IOP Publishing and what you ...
- Clarification of research integrity norms in diverse research disciplineson April 28, 2022 at 6:52 pm
Recently, research institutions in Japan have developed systems to ensure research integrity. However, although research integrity norms are common in general, judgments on what specific actions ...
- Research Integrity and Ethicson April 28, 2022 at 8:20 am
Research staff must act in an appropriate manner, always maintaining the expected standards of rigour and integrity relevant to their research work. The University has a responsibility to ensure the ...
- Human researchon April 4, 2022 at 8:23 pm
The University's Institutional Review Board (IRB), through Research Integrity, is responsible for protecting the rights and welfare of human research participants for all research activities conducted ...
- Research misconducton April 4, 2022 at 8:23 pm
The University is committed to the highest possible standards of integrity in research. This commitment is fundamental to the University's mission in fostering the pursuit of truth and the expansion ...
- Research Integrity Principleson December 9, 2021 at 9:57 pm
The University Research and Projects Policy applies to all researchers at Boston College. Students or faculty members should be aware of the University's policy on Academic Integrity.
- Research Integrityon December 9, 2021 at 9:31 pm
We strive to be researchers of integrity who "[serve] society . . . by producing nationally and internationally significant research that advances insight and understanding, thereby both enriching ...
via Bing News