School of Business and Economics, Sonoma State University, 1801 East Cotati Avenue, Rohnert Park, CA, 94928, USA.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2012 Jun;18(2):241-6. doi: 10.1007/s11948-011-9260-8. Epub 2011 Mar 2.
Reports of research fraud have raised concerns about research integrity similar to concerns raised about financial accounting fraud. We propose a departure from self-regulation in that researchers adopt the financial accounting approach in establishing trust through an external validation process, in addition to the reporting entities and the regulatory agencies. The general conceptual framework for reviewing financial reports, utilizes external auditors who are certified and objective in using established standards to provide an opinion on the financial reports. These standards have become both broader in scope and increasingly specific as to what information is reported and the methodologies to be employed. We believe that the financial reporting overhaul encompassed in the US Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which aims at preventing accounting fraud, can be applied to scientific research in 4 ways. First, Sarbanes-Oxley requires corporations to have a complete set of internal accounting controls. Research organizations should use appropriate sampling techniques and audit research projects for conformity with the initial research protocols. Second, corporations are required to have the chief financial officer certify the accuracy of their financial statements. In a similar way, each research organization should have their vice-president of research (or equivalent) certify the research integrity of their research activities. In contrast, the primary responsibility of the existing Research Integrity Officers is to handle allegations of research misconduct, an after-the-fact activity. Third, generally accepted auditing standards specify the appropriate procedures for external review of a corporation's financial statements. For similar reasons, the research review process would also require corresponding external auditing standards. Finally, these new requirements would be implemented in stages, with the largest 14 research organizations that receive 25% of the total National Institutes of Health funding, adopting these research oversight enhancements first.
研究欺诈的报告引发了人们对研究诚信的关注，这与对财务会计欺诈的关注类似。我们提出了一种背离自我监管的做法，即研究人员通过外部验证过程，除了报告实体和监管机构之外，采用财务会计方法来建立信任。审查财务报告的一般概念框架利用经过认证的外部审计师，他们在使用既定标准时是客观的，对财务报告发表意见。这些标准在报告的信息范围和所采用的方法方面变得越来越广泛和具体。我们认为，美国 2002 年《萨班斯-奥克斯利法案》涵盖的财务报告改革可以通过以下 4 种方式应用于科学研究。首先，萨班斯-奥克斯利法案要求公司建立一套完整的内部会计控制制度。研究组织应该使用适当的抽样技术和审计研究项目，以确保与最初的研究方案保持一致。其次，公司必须要求首席财务官证明其财务报表的准确性。同样，每个研究组织都应该要求他们的研究副总裁（或同等职位）证明其研究活动的研究诚信。相比之下，现有研究诚信官员的主要职责是处理研究不端行为的指控，这是事后的活动。第三，公认的审计标准规定了对公司财务报表进行外部审查的适当程序。出于类似的原因，研究审查过程也需要相应的外部审计标准。最后，这些新要求将分阶段实施，最大的 14 个研究组织（占国立卫生研究院总资助的 25%）将首先采用这些研究监督增强措施。
