China attempts to crack down on scientific fraud

SciDev reports that in an attempt to combat scientific misconduct, the Chinese Ministry of Education has 'stipulated seven acts of academic misconduct and how they will be punished.' The circular states that plagiarism, falsifying data and references, fabricating CVs and changing others' academic achievements or signing their names without permission are scientific misconduct.

The new measures are aimed at higher education institutions after a recent scandal saw an associate professor and dean of pharmaceutical science lose their jobs over allegations of copying data. Higher education institutions are consequentially also under pressure to train teachers and students in good academic conduct.

Hou Xinyi (Nankai University) is quoted as saying that 'it is the government-controlled grant and award system that has spawned misconduct among Chinese academia', with this system making it easier for those in higher positions to win funding leaving researchers under pressure to gain contacts in addition to publishing in as many high impact journals as possible.

Read the SciDev article in full.

Misconduct policy comes under fire

A new standard procedure outlining how universities should investigate allegations of research misconduct issued by the UK research Integrity Office (UKRIO) has come under fire. The new procedure dictates that universities should use at least one external investigator, but only after a complaint has been "screened" by senior staff to decide if it is sufficiently serious. The procedure has faced criticism from those who believe a mandatory system is needed. Aubrey Blumsohn, a campaigner for greater openness in the investigation of misconduct is quoted in THES as saying, "It remains the case that one or more powerful individuals are doing the investigating and the balance of power remains heavily tilted towards those who wish to maintain institutional decorum at all costs. It seems to be an attempt to put something in place to placate critics but is more like a Band-Aid on a cancer."

Read the THES article in full

Survey Sparks Concern

After polling more than 2,200 US federally funded scientists, a report has found that the rate at which research fraud among scientists is reported is alarmingly low. The results (published in Nature) gave an estimate of 2,325 possible cases of research fraud each year. THES reports that the survey, 'said to be the most systematic to date, found that only 58% of all the cases were reported to university officials'.

Read the THES article in full

Can ethics be independent?

In the latest edition of Science in Parliament, The Baroness Warnock and Professor Lord Alton of Liverpool present conflicting views on the formation of a National Human Bioethics Commission. While Warnock argues that ‘such a body is unnecessary, and would be both expensive and possibly damaging in its effects’ and could conflict with existing bodies, HFEA and the Nuffield Council for Bioethics. She recognises that those in favour of establishing a commission, ‘suggest that the Nuffield Council, being funded by the Nuffield Foundation and the Wellcome Trust, is necessarily biased toward science. They advocate the new body in the belief that religion and a morality deprived from religion would be better represented on it.’

These views are echoed by Lord Alton who states that the new Commission should be separate and independent from particular government departments, ‘.. it would be a way of redressing a debate too frequently dominated by vested interests or by small elites who for two decades have enjoyed free reign in shaping the bioethics agenda.’