Page 89 - Academic and Research Book_WEB

2. Pursue the truth — Perform research which is evidence-based and independent of bias.

3. Minimize harm — To all stakeholders including people, animals, the environment, etc.
4. Engage with decision makers — Most scientists stay in their labs and refuse to join hands with
the government or with policy makers – this is wrong because engaging with decision-makers
offers an opportunity to effect a change. Refusing to do so is an opportunity lost.

5. Support diversity — This is not important only from the spirit of fairness, but also because
diversity in groups results in increased innovation.
6. Be a mentor — This is crucial to develop the next generation of thinkers and scientists.
7. Be accountable — Take responsibility for your actions and tread the right path for the benefit of
your mentees and society.

Cost of Scientific Misconduct

The cost of scientific misconduct is huge. To begin with, it damages the author as well as the
1
institution. Jobs are lost, degrees are revoked in addition to the loss of prestige and reputation of the
scientist. Institutions and journals are ‘brands’ and the brand takes a hit.
Misconduct hurts the profession and sets it back, often for years. Bollande, et al. (2016), evaluated the
integrity of 33 randomized controlled trials (in orthopaedics) by the Japanese group lead by Yoshihiro
Sato because there were doubts about their veracity. The flaws and obvious fraud that they were able
to illustrate in these studies were responsible, in part, for 21 of the trials being ultimately retracted.
However, other meta-analyses, which had already been performed using these studies before the
retraction, have probably led to misleading conclusions (Kupferchmidt, 2018).

Another excellent example of how progress in science is stifled is the Wakefield affair, which has resulted
in many parents refusing to get their children vaccinated — despite the clear evidence now that his data
was fabricated (Tharyan, op. cit.). The public’s trust, in science in general, gets corroded as well.

A specific cost that applies to biological and medical research is that it puts animals and/or patients
at risk. One does not have to be an animal rights activist or physicians to decide that this is obviously
unacceptable.

The economic loss has also to be considered. There does not seem to be any data from India on
this. However, we have reports from the West, which serve as an indicator as to what the financial
losses are. Stern, et al. (2014), have shown that the 291 papers that were retracted due to misconduct
accounted for about $58 million in direct funding by the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, USA
for the period 1992 to 2012 this formed less than 1per cent of the NIH budget for this period. Each
of these articles accounted for a mean of $392,582 in direct costs. Another study, by Michalek, et al.
(2010), calculated the expense that was entailed in one particular investigation of research misconduct.
Their estimate was that the direct cost of the investigation was US $ 525,000. This estimate did not
include many factors that were difficult to measure.

Lawsuits and other legal costs are further economic burdens on the investigator as well as the
organization. The time that the researcher and others who have been on the wrong track lose, because
of the initial fraudulent research also needs to be factored in.
Finally, and most certainly not the least of the problems, is that when discovered, it shames the
fraudulent researcher as well as his (and do note that it is almost always a his – a subject, perhaps for
further research) or her family. An unexpected side-effect of the misconduct discovered by Bolland, et
al. was that Sato committed suicide (Kupferchmidt, op. cit.).

78 | University Grants Commission