Extreme Climate Survey
Science News is collecting reader questions about how to navigate our planet's changing climate.
What do you want to know about extreme heat and how it can lead to extreme weather events?
The worst offenders — those who repeatedly falsify data or rip off others’ work — might not be worth reforming, says DuBois, an ethicist at St. Louis University and Washington University in St. Louis. But he thinks that many wrongdoers can become good scientific citizens again.
Story continues below slideshow
A review of published surveys of scientific misconduct shows that about 2 percent of all scientists admit to having fudged or made up data. About a third admitted other questionable practices such as dropping data based on a “gut feeling.” D. Fanelli/plos one 2009
Many more scientists say they have observed colleagues committing scientific misconduct than admit to doing so themselves. D. Fanelli/plos one 2009
An analysis of 228 life scientists who committed misconduct (94 percent of it fraud) found that two-thirds of offenders were male. The percentage of males was disproportionately larger than the representation of men in those fields of study. source: F.C. Fang et al/mbio 2013
Only a small percentage of scientific wrongdoers are fired. Among scientists reported by their institutions as having committed an infraction (anything from improper consent forms to fraud), most received reprimands and other corrective measures. j. dubois et al/clin. Trans. Sci. 2013
Misconduct covers many transgressions, from fabricating data outright to failing to follow rules governing patient or animal welfare. The first RePAIR session, held in January in St. Louis, put three researchers who had failed to follow research rules through an intensive three-day program. DuBois says that future sessions may also include scientists guilty of more serious offenses.
The program operates under strict anonymity on a first-name-only basis. Participants are even allowed to choose a pseudonym. But they can’t hide their transgressions: In intensive group sessions, each researcher in the January group recounted his or her case. It was uncomfortable, DuBois says. “They spoke very openly about feeling punished,” he says. “Initially, there’s a lot of resistance and denial that they’ve done anything wrong.”
Gradually, the instructors guided the scientists to take responsibility and change habits to avoid being demonized by their community. “We tell them, ‘Whether you think it’s fair or not, you’ve got these horns and you need to do something to fix it,’” DuBois says.
Each participant left with an action plan to rebuild trust at his or her university. Program organizers are following up with phone calls over three months and if they are satisfied, the scientist will get a certificate of successful completion. “This is not one of those programs where you can show up, breathe for three days and get a certificate,” DuBois says.
Similar programs for physicians called before disciplinary boards have about an 80 percent success rate, meaning no further violations, DuBois says. He hopes to match that performance. So far, he says, his first batch of researchers seems to be working to repair their reputations and careers.
That’s more than would usually happen. Few scientists get fired for misconduct, unless it is a particularly outrageous or high-profile case; most get a slap on the wrist and are taken back. “Schools are doing this all the time,” DuBois says. “So we’re trying to present the best possible effort to prevent recidivism.”
Saving a scientist’s career is good for more than just that scientist, DuBois says. Graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, technicians and other laboratory employees also stand to lose their jobs when a researcher is fired. Universities lose money and prestige, too. Dubois hopes that with training, former wrongdoers might even help keep others from heading down the dark path. “Hopefully you’ll find that they will be model citizens.”