Related Experiment Videos
Ethical dilemmas and solutions for risk assessment scientists
1Department of Urban Studies and Community Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08903.
Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology
|October 1, 1992
Summary
A survey of Society for Risk Analysis (SRA) scientists found that while blatant scientific misconduct is rare, plagiarism and data misrepresentation are more common. Members favor education and advice hotlines over government intervention for prevention.
Area of Science:
- Risk analysis
- Toxicology
- Epidemiology
- Industrial hygiene
- Social sciences
- Exposure assessment
- Statistics
- Risk communication
Background:
- Scientific misconduct poses a threat to research integrity and public trust.
- The Society for Risk Analysis (SRA) comprises diverse scientific experts who may encounter ethical challenges in their work.
Purpose of the Study:
- To survey U.S. Society for Risk Analysis members regarding their observations of workplace unethical behavior.
- To assess members' opinions on the effectiveness of misconduct prevention programs.
Main Methods:
- A sample survey was distributed to U.S. members of the Society for Risk Analysis.
- Respondents reported observations of various unethical behaviors and their opinions on prevention strategies.
Main Results:
- Low rates of data fabrication/destruction (7%) were reported, but 21% observed plagiarism.
- Significant percentages reported overstating positive results (51%) or understating negative results (51%).
- Human subjects violations were reported by less than 4% of respondents.
Conclusions:
- While egregious misconduct is infrequent, subtle data manipulation and plagiarism are notable concerns within the risk analysis community.
- Society for Risk Analysis members expressed skepticism towards government intervention for misconduct prevention.
- Members showed greater support for educational initiatives, seminars, and confidential advice hotlines.