-
14. Scientific Ethics and Integrity
- University of Michigan Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
228 | BEYOND SPUTNIK 228 CHAPTER 14 Scientific Ethics and Integrity Why Care about Ethics in Scientific Research? The term ethics, for our purposes, is taken to mean “the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group.”1 Why are research ethics so important that the topic merits an entire chapter in a book on national science policy? As former National Academies leaders Bruce Alberts and Kenneth Shine point out, “The scientific research enterprise is built on a foundation of trust: trust that the results reported by others are valid and trust that the source of novel ideas will be appropriately acknowledged in the scientific literature.”2 If this trust is broken, then the entire scientific enterprise is put at risk. Ensuring the integrity of science and that the science is performed ethically, morally, and in socially responsible ways should be a concern of the entire scientific community. There are incentives in science, as in any field, to be dishonest or less than truthful. Not all people are naturally motivated to report the facts as they find them, to give credit to the work of others, or to avoid situations where they might benefit by shading their interpretation. But any introduction of suspect information into scientific study can undermine outcomes. False information can mislead scientists, doctors, engineers, politicians, and the public at large, with potentially disastrous consequences. Scientific fraud could, for instance, delay the search for a cure to a specific disease, or hinder the development of a cutting-edge medical technology. Beyond this, abuses waste public money and greatly erode public confidence in scientists, scientific research, and scientific results. States the National Academies in its introductory guide to scientists on the ethical conduct of research, “The scientific research enterprise, like other human activities, is built on a foundation of trust. . . . This trust will endure only if the scientific community devotes itself to exemplifying and transmitting the values associated with ethical scientific conduct.”3 The scientific community therefore diligently imposes its own ethical standards on its members. When these standards are violated, or even sometimes when it only appears that they may have been violated, the federal government often becomes involved. This is even more likely to happen when the violations involve federally funded research. There are also other times when society may impose certain ethical values on the scientific community. Such policies may be imposed by policymakers through laws or regulations that restrict the activities or nature of research in which scientists can be engaged. Sometimes these regulations might pertain to how research is conducted, such as research involving animals or human subjects. Other times, whole areas of research might be regulated by policymakers for moral or ethical reasons, such as in the use of fetal tissue or human embryonic stem cells in research. Scientific ethics reach far beyond individual conscience and morality. Remember that scientific research builds on prior knowledge (the “pyramid of knowledge”), so any ethical breach can push a field backward, wasting irreplaceable resources. While scientists do continually check and cross-check each other’s work, even the hard work of identifying and isolating bad data can require precious time and resources. Since science is by definition the search for “truth” or knowledge, why would any scientist introduce false concepts into the field? Some introduce faulty data because of a quest for personal fame and a desire to be associated with a major discovery. Recognition can, in principle, Scientific Ethics and Integrity | 229 benefit a particular researcher both financially and professionally for the rest of his or her life, and the temptation to take the low road is more than some can resist. The associated questions relating to ethics in scientific research are numerous, and differ in their complexity: What are the appropriate mechanisms for giving credit to work done by others? What distinction can be made between maliciously misleading results and the products of sloppy research? How should credit for new discoveries be shared between senior and junior researchers? How do we manage potential conflicts of interest that could adversely affect research results? What is the role of human or animal subjects in research and how do we protect them against research abuses? What limits should be placed on scientists conducting research in areas such as cloning or human embryonic stem cells (hESC)? And finally, if a scientific discovery could be used for harmful purposes, are scientists responsible for bringing their findings to the attention of the authorities, even if it means discontinuing their research...