The SRA Symposium - College of Medicine

Papers
place blame at the feet of irresponsible journalists who at best are careless in their reporting, if not
deliberately misleading. Shuchman and Wilkes recommend that members of the research community
take an active role in ensuring honest reporting. They suggest that scientists check institutional
press releases for accuracy and clarity; medical journals and sponsors of medical meeting
should seek expert advice to place new information in the proper context; the scientific community
must inform journalists of any potential conflict of interest; and finally, industry sponsorship
of research and persons who speak or write about a research should be identified as such.
I agree that research integrity issues are multi-faceted. There are many stakeholders, and these are
not problems for researchers to tackle alone. All of us in the research community have a voice and
an important role to play. As Martinson remarked at the conclusion of his survey, “We should be
asking what kind of aspects in science are fostering [these questionable practices] and are there
ways of addressing them to make them better” (Mitchell, 2005).
As citizens in a democratic society, we have a duty to hold issues of integrity—in science, business,
politics, education, or elsewhere—to a very bright light. If we fail to do so, those who suffered and
perished as result of the Nazi WW-II experiments, were deceived in the Tuskegee Study of untreated
Syphilis, or fell victim to research delays in the early—or present—days of the AIDS epidemic,
did so in vain. To have learned these lessons, only to discard them for the sake of corporate greed,
Nobel-Prize-blind-sightedness, journalistic sensationalism or religious dogma is unacceptable.
Programs like the University of Pittsburgh’s “Survival Skills and Ethics” course have sought to address
these issues for twenty years. They attempt to integrate ethics and the responsible conduct
of research into every topic. The Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Research
Integrity offers institutions grant money to develop pilot programs to teach graduate students
responsible conduct of research. The assumption is that if we make greater efforts to educate
students about integrity issues, then the incidents of misconduct will be reduced. However, ethics
education is not a one shot deal.
My trainees in the Tri-institutional Responsible Conduct of Research Program (co-sponsored by
Weill Medical College, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, The Rockefeller University since
the early 1990’s) lament: You can’t force-feed someone ethics. You cannot transform someone into
an ethical being in every instance by mandating course attendance and completion.
Rather, ethics education is an ongoing life-long process that individuals must choose as a way of
life and that peers, mentors and colleagues must model. Regulations change from administration
to administration, but good science must remain unspoiled by the political flavor of the month.
Can we find common moral ground among ideology, pedagogy and reality through mandatory
ethics training? There is power in numbers and unity. For a single university to tackle this dilemma
alone is as foolish as waiting for something to go drastically—and publicly—wrong. RCR
training should not be viewed as “punishment.” Martinson cautions that it would be dangerous
for a single institution to try and address research misconduct in isolation, because this could put
them at a “distinct disadvantage” regarding competition for grants and other resources from other
universities (Mitchell, 2005). As sad a commentary as that is, it is a reality that needs to be acknowledged
and addressed in a way that does not dilute the importance of doing what is right for
its own sake.
To date there is no extant empirical data of which I am aware to support whether mandatory training
affects ethical behavior and decision-making in a positive way. Of course, if I reach retirement
without seeing my institution or one of my trainees in the headlines for scientific misconduct, that
would be a victory of sorts. More over, I would be satisfied when I stop seeing cynical evaluation
238 2005 Symposium Proceedings Book