Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Research Misconduct Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Regents adopt research-misconduct policy aligning with federal definition; add provisions on detrimental research practices
Summary
The committee adopted amendments to the Regents' research-misconduct policy to mirror the federal ORI definition (fabrication, falsification, plagiarism), added definitions for intent standards and a list of "detrimental research practices," and removed broader catchall phrases in favor of other administrative processes.
The Mission Fulfillment Committee voted to adopt amendments to the Board of Regents' policy on research misconduct that align the university's definition with the federal Office of Research Integrity (ORI) standard. Presenters said the revised Regents policy limits the term "research misconduct" to fabrication, falsification and plagiarism and clarifies that honest error and differences of scientific opinion are excluded.
Associate Vice President Joanne Billings and colleagues explained that the amendments remove vague catchall phrases previously included in the Regents policy (for example, "abuse of confidentiality," "destruction of data for fraudulent purposes" and broad "fraudulent actions") and place many of those concerns into administrative, IRB, IACUC or sponsored-projects processes better suited to the facts of individual cases. The committee heard new definitions for the culpability standards used in findings'including "intentionally," "knowingly," and "recklessly"'and that findings will require proof by a preponderance of the evidence, consistent with federal practice.
The policy also adds a subdivision enumerating "detrimental research practices" that threaten the integrity of research but fall outside the narrow misconduct definition; examples cited included noncompliance with sponsored projects, misuse of research funds, failures to acquire or store data properly, toxic workplace behavior such as berating or sabotaging, and neglectful supervision.
Chair Johnson asked for a motion; a motion to adopt the amendments was made and seconded, the committee discussed clarifying ties between the Regents policy and an administrative policy that will carry operational procedures, and the committee approved the motion by voice vote. Presenters said the administrative policy will set out procedural steps and definitions used when allegations are filed and will align with federal expectations and peer institutions.
