<< Previous Section | < Previous Page | Next Page > | Next Section >> Case: Research Integrity Jones is a highly successful entrepreneurial academic scientist. He occupies an endowed chair that allows him to avoid teaching. His research team performs brilliantly conceived studies with precision and completeness. His lab has made many important contributions and he is consistently very well funded. A graduate student is considering Jones' lab for his Ph.D. and speaks to the current trainees. They say that Jones is merciless, requiring 15-hour days for months before the annual meeting abstract due date. He assigns projects without regard to the trainee's interests, has trainees compete with each other, unilaterally determines authorship and first authorship in what appears to be an arbitrary manner and deals with staff and trainees in a paternalistic and demeaning manner. He personally spends little time with his trainees and shows little interest in their lives. His usual comment is that research is extremely competitive and they had better learn how to fend for themselves. His trainees almost invariably get excellent positions after completing their degrees with him. QUESTIONS: Does the investigator have research integrity? Intellectual honesty? Defend your answer. If you were the student, would you select his lab? Defend your answer. The department chair and dean know all about this lab chief's behavior and have never discussed it with him. What responsibilities does the administration have in relation to Jones' behavior? Defend your answer. << Previous Section | < Previous Page | Next Page > | Next Section >> Chapter 1 Quick Links The Ethical Basis of RCRH The Nature of Science Research Integrity Professionalism in Science Practical Elements of Responsible Research Conduct Cases Bibliography Chapter 1 Download (PDF)