Affiliation:
1. School of Life Sciences, Associated Faculty, Center for Biology and Society, Associated Faculty, Neurodegenerative Disease Research Center Arizona State University Tempe Arizona USA
Abstract
AbstractThis essay assesses the rationale for regulating research administrators as carefully as they regulate researchers. The reasons for such regulation are identical: protecting scientific integrity, ensuring responsible use of public funds, addressing the lack of effective recourse for victims, creating negative consequences for misbehaving actors, and addressing high incentives for misconduct. Whereas the reasons compelling us to regulate research administrators are obvious, counterarguments to administrative oversight are based on suggestions that the incidence and prevalence of cases of administrative misconduct are too low to warrant formal regulation. I briefly describe examples of the phenomenon drawn from publicly available records. My analysis suggests that the misconduct of research administrators is both serious and worthy of better oversight. Improved oversight of research administration will help steward tax dollars appropriately and enhance the overall integrity of the scientific record and of the free pursuit of knowledge more generally.
Reference12 articles.
1. Misconduct in research administration: What is it? How widespread is it? And what should we do about it?
2. Scientific Integrity Fast‐Track Action Committee (SI‐FTAC) of the National Science and Technology Council. (2022).Protecting the integrity of government science. Available via:https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/news‐updates/2022/01/11/white‐house‐office‐of‐science‐technology‐policy‐releases‐scientific‐integrity‐task‐force‐report/
3. Due Process in Investigations of Research Misconduct