Skip to main content

Scientific Misconduct

PPD-0104

It is the responsibility of researchers, scholars, and administrators to create and sustain an atmosphere where honesty and integrity in the conduct of research and scholarly activity are paramount.

The policies and procedures concerning scientific misconduct are specified in the William & Mary Faculty Handbook

 In addition to the regulations of William & Mary, the federal government’s Office of Research Integrity, Department of Health and Human Services promulgates policies and regulations which apply to many government supported research activities.  The web page of the Office of Sponsored Programs maintains links to those policies and procedures.

At the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS), concerns about possible scientific misconduct should be brought to the Section Chair, the Associate Dean of Research and Advisory Services, or the Dean and Director.  The Associate Dean of Research and Advisory Services is the senior administrator responsible for enforcing the procedures for dealing with scientific misconduct.  Should the Associate Dean of Research and Advisory Services for any reason be unable to fill that role, the Associate Dean of Graduate Studies will have the responsibility.

 In any incident where there is an allegation of or an inquiry or investigation of scientific misconduct, it is exceptionally important that all aspects of that incident be handled in a confidential manner.  Confidentiality and secrecy are necessary elements in the procedures in order to protect all parties, the person making the allegation, the person accused of misconduct, and the Institute’s scientific reputation.  However, at certain stages in the process, it may be necessary to notify funding agencies and other parties both internal and external to VIMS.  The individual making the allegation must be protected from retribution of any sort except when it is conclusively demonstrated that the charges were maliciously motivated.

A formal assessment of an allegation of misconduct cannot begin until the allegation has been presented in writing to the Associate Dean of Research and Advisory Services.

The following is a portion of the section on Integrity in Research and Scholarly Activity from the Faculty Handbook.

 Guidelines and Procedures for Dealing with Academic Misconduct

a. Definitions of Academic Misconduct.

Although it may be more specifically defined at the school, sectional, or discipline level, academic misconduct is broadly defined to include fraudulent behavior such as: fabrication or falsification, plagiarism, misappropriation, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the particular scholarly community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research or other scholarly endeavors.  It also includes material failure to comply with requirements for protection of researchers, human subjects, or the public, or for ensuring the welfare of laboratory animals, or failure to meet other material legal requirements governing research.  Misconduct also includes retaliation of any kind against a person who reported or provided information about suspected or alleged misconduct and who has not acted in bad faith. Further, it can include unwarranted reference to an exonerated case of misconduct or accusations of misconduct when such accusations are made in bad faith.  It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of results of scholarly activity.

More precise definitions of the first three types of misconduct mentioned above are as follows:

  1. Falsification ranges from fabrication to deceptively selective reporting and includes the purposeful omission of conflicting data with the intent to condition or falsify results.
  2. Plagiarism means appropriating the ideas, methods, or written words of another, without acknowledgment and with the intention that they be taken as the work of the deceiver.
  3. Misappropriation which is the unauthorized use of privileged information (such as violation of confidentiality in peer review) for gain (material or otherwise), however obtained.

b. Any member of the W&M community who becomes aware of an apparent instance of academic misconduct in scholarly activity or research has the responsibility to try to resolve the issue directly with the party or parties involved. If direct consultation is inappropriate or unsuccessful, the Section Chair of the accused or an appropriate administrative officer if the accused has no Section Chair should then be informed immediately.  If the Section Chair or a higher administrative officer is the accused, the next higher administrative supervisor will be informed.  Inability to successfully resolve the issue at the administrative level requires the initiation of an informal inquiry.  In all instances, persons giving information in good faith about questionable conduct should be protected against reprisals.

In all proceedings, it is essential that confidentiality be maintained to the extent practicable. The mere suspicion of wrongdoing, even if totally unjustified, is potentially damaging to an investigator's career.  Confidential handling of information about an investigation must be the responsibility of all involved. Thus, information concerning any investigation should be available only to those who need to know.  Ideally, an inquiry should remain totally confidential until the results are established with reasonable certainty.  Indeed, if the investigation were to conclude that no wrongdoing occurred, the suspicion should be obliterated from memory.  However, this ideal is difficult or impossible to attain.  Nonetheless, unwarranted reference to an exonerated case, so as to impugn, may, in itself, constitute misconduct.  This situation may, however, be made easier by recognizing that scholarly endeavors and results should always be open to inspection, evaluation, and criticism.  In this spirit, all involved should be encouraged to accept an investigation of alleged misconduct as part of the process of the search for truth.