On "intent" in research misconduct.

Area of Science:

• Scientific integrity
• Research ethics
• Academic misconduct

Background:

• Research misconduct, including fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism, undermines scientific values and public trust.
• Determining culpability in research misconduct necessitates establishing intent, which is subjective and difficult to prove objectively.
• Existing frameworks for addressing research misconduct often struggle with the subjective nature of intent.

Purpose of the Study:

• To explore the concept of "intent" in research misconduct from criminological, legal, and psychological viewpoints.
• To propose a novel framework for establishing culpable intent in research misconduct adjudications.
• To enhance the objectivity and fairness of sanctions for scientific misconduct.

Main Methods:

• Review and analysis of criminological and legal definitions of "intent."
• Exploration of psychological models and tools relevant to understanding intent.
• Development of a conceptual framework integrating legal and psychological approaches for evidence gathering.

Main Results:

• "Intent" in research misconduct is a complex construct influenced by legal and psychological factors.
• A proposed framework offers structured methods for investigating and evaluating evidence of intent.
• The framework aims to provide a preponderance of evidence for culpable intent in misconduct cases.

Conclusions:

• Integrating legal and psychological perspectives can improve the determination of intent in research misconduct.
• The proposed framework can aid in more consistent and evidence-based adjudications of research misconduct.
• This approach has the potential to ensure more appropriate and just sanctions for scientific misconduct.