All misdeeds great and small

I wonder who paid for this study...
Article 1: "Public trust in the integrity and ethical behavior of scholars must be maintained if research is to continue to play its proper role in our university and society.'

Item 2: The US Office of Research Integrity recently made changes to its ethics rules, including "reviewing" as part of its definition of misconduct--meaning a reviewer who plagiarizes an application for federal funding can be charged with misconduct. The change is apparently inspired by allegations of plagiarism in peer reviewers of applications for NIH funds.

Crisis? Again, no; again, vigilance is required and the occasional miscreants should be "named and shamed."

Item 3: A commentary with the tantalizing title 'Scientists behaving badly.' (3) This turns out not to be lewd tabloid revelations but a survey of the professional conduct of several thousand researchers. "US scientists engage in a range of behaviors extending far beyond falsification, fabrication and plagiarism (FFP)" the authors conclude. Actually the series of misdemeanors are less serious, than, not far beyond, FFP. But the collective admission of guilt is shockingly high. One-third of scientists admitted to at least one transgression from a list of 16 that range from questionable to intolerable. These included 15% who changed the design, methods, or results of their research under pressure from a sponsor, 12.5% who overlooked other scientists' use of flawed data or questionable interpretations, 7% who ignored "minor rules" involving research subjects, and, 6% who withheld data that contradicted their previous conclusions.

Crisis? It possibly is. The full extent of these questionable practices is unknown, their growth over time is unexplored, their impact is undiscovered and the proper response to them is unclear. Clearly more study is needed.

"The level of competition in science has absolutely skyrocketed," lead author Brian Martinson was quoted saying in one paper. "There is often a level of desperation that may lead people to behave badly." (4) But with no historical data, we can't blindly accept this as a recent and growing problem.

Re-education in ethics--especially for more senior scientists, who are more likely to offend--must be another priority. We may need a precise code of practice, along with enforceable penalties.