The Walter C. Randall Lecture. Facing the dark side: research misconduct and strategies to improve self regulation.

We know from major scandals in the recent past that many professions have been severely and adversely affected when our society recognized large lapses in ethical standards. Unfortunately, each profession has suffered from members who knew about fraudulent or other highly problematic behaviors, but who contributed to cover-ups such that the public remained unaware of the problem. They hoped that a pretense of normality and denial could be successfully sustained. When the dam has burst on various occasions, the public has learned not only about an ethical lapse in question at the time, but also that the professions’ leaders had foreknowledge and awareness, yet had not taken appropriate and needed action. It is small wonder that the public in these instances is outraged in the face of what appears to be a total and complete failure in selfregulation. The purpose of this paper is first to examine available data on research misconduct, and second to explore whether there is reason to suspect that scientists might be operating with pretense and denial. Do these indicators reflect an early harbinger as we have seen in other professions? Thus, throughout this abbreviated review of social science research on research misconduct, I will raise questions about the effectiveness of self regulation. I also will discuss two essential strategies that can be applied to prevent misconduct, promote integrity and build professional self-regulation, supervision, and whistleblower protection. The Office of Research Integrity (ORI) has collected data for the last 18 years on research misconduct cases that are reported to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) by universities. ORI does not seek and discover cases, but rather provides oversight and