Research misconduct: Can Australia learn from the UK's stuttering system?

Abstract

• Research and publication misconduct is commoner than many believe, hard to detect and difficult to investigate, with institutions often being reluctant to take action. • The first countries to set up formal systems for policing research misconduct were the United States and some Scandinavian countries. • The US Office of Research Integrity (ORI) is a useful model for other countries; rather than conduct investigations, the ORI supervises the investigation by the respondent's institution. • The United Kingdom has taken more than 10 years to set up a national supervisory body - the UK Panel for Research Integrity in Health and Biomedical Sciences. Unlike the ORI, it has no statutory basis. It is too early to tell whether the procedures set up in the UK will work. • The present trend for governments to encourage universities to link up with industry may lead to a culture of secrecy and confused accountability. • In any country, including Australia, intent on policing research, it is only possible for editors, reviewers or readers to initiate investigations, not undertake them, as power lies in the hands of employers, research funders and regulatory bodies.