Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012;19(1):56-63.
doi: 10.1080/08989621.2012.650948.

Misconduct versus honest error and scientific disagreement

Affiliations

Misconduct versus honest error and scientific disagreement

David B Resnik et al. Account Res. 2012.

Abstract

Researchers sometimes mistakenly accuse their peers of misconduct. It is important to distinguish between misconduct and honest error or a difference of scientific opinion to prevent unnecessary and time-consuming misconduct proceedings, protect scientists from harm, and avoid deterring researchers from using novel methods or proposing controversial hypotheses. While it is obvious to many researchers that misconduct is different from a scientific disagreement or simply an inadvertent mistake in methods, analysis or misinterpretation of data, applying this distinction to real cases is sometimes not easy. Because the line between misconduct and honest error or a scientific dispute is often unclear, research organizations and institutions should distinguish between misconduct and honest error and scientific disagreement in their policies and practices. These distinctions should also be explained during educational sessions on the responsible conduct of research and in the mentoring process. When researchers wrongfully accuse their peers of misconduct, it is important to help them understand the distinction between misconduct and honest error and differences of scientific judgment or opinion, pinpoint the source of disagreement, and identify the relevant scientific norms. They can be encouraged to settle the dispute through collegial discussion and dialogue, rather than a misconduct allegation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Misconduct vs. Honest Error and Scientific Disagreement Decision-Tree

References

    1. Abramson SB. Differing opinion, not misconduct. Nature. 2011;470:465. - PubMed
    1. DeAngelis CD, Fontanarosa PB. Impugning the integrity of medical science: the adverse effects of industry influence. JAMA. 2008;299:1833–1835. - PubMed
    1. Fisher LD, et al. In: Statistical Issues in Drug Research and Development. Peace KE, editor. New York: Marcel Dekker; 1990. pp. 331–50.
    1. Gamow G. Thirty Years that Shook Physics: The Story of Quantum Theory. New York: Dover; 1985.
    1. Garamszegi LZ, et al. Changing philosophies and tools for statistical inferences in behavioral ecology. Behavior Eco. 2009;20:1363–1375.

LinkOut - more resources