Shore E G
Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115.
Acad Med. 1993 Sep;68(9 Suppl):S44-8. doi: 10.1097/00001888-199309000-00033.
The last decade of experience indicates that the number of confirmed instances of research misconduct remains extremely small. Yet, each institution that has had an investigation recognizes how damaging even one case is to the scientific enterprise in terms of the morale of scientists working with or near the one found guilty, in terms of public trust in the research enterprise, and in terms of the consumption of extraordinary amounts of faculty effort to conduct a fair and thorough investigation of the allegation. Every research institution has a strong interest in developing its diagnostic, treatment, and preventive capacities to the point where this scientific illness is as nearly eradicated as possible. The author suggests a spectrum of responses to match the spectrum of offenses in order to protect the scientist, the scientific community, the institution, and the public. In some instances remediation as well as sanctions may be indicated. Remediation in this context applies both to the scientist and to the research institution because both may have problems that need correction or modification to ensure the integrity of science. Institutional improvement in developing and applying sanctions and remediation should contribute both to more effective treatment and to better prevention strategies.
过去十年的经验表明，已证实的科研不端行为实例数量极少。然而，每一个进行过调查的机构都认识到，哪怕只有一起案件，从与被认定有罪者共事或在其附近工作的科学家的士气、公众对科研事业的信任，以及为对指控进行公正彻底调查而耗费大量教师精力等方面来看，对科学事业的损害都是巨大的。每个研究机构都极为关注发展其诊断、处理和预防能力，以使这种科学弊病尽可能被根除。作者建议采取一系列应对措施来匹配不同程度的违规行为，以保护科学家、科学界、机构和公众。在某些情况下，可能既需要制裁也需要补救。在这种情况下，补救措施既适用于科学家，也适用于研究机构，因为两者都可能存在需要纠正或改进的问题，以确保科学的诚信。机构在制定和实施制裁及补救措施方面的改进，应有助于更有效地处理问题，并制定更好的预防策略。
