This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (3)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

A Scientist's View From the Inside

Julius S. Youngner, ScD

JAMA. 1998;279:62-64.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

THE REVIEW PROCESS provided by the Research Integrity Adjudications Panel (RIAP) at the US Department of Health and Human Services Departmental Appeals Board (DAB) received a great deal of attention in the wake of the Imanishi-Kari decision issued in June 1996. As an active member of the research community, I have been interested in our ongoing attempts to address the problem of scientific misconduct, a problem that has demanded more attention as research has expanded and the competition for funding has affected every program. My perspective on this problem has been influenced by being the only scientist who has served on 2 RIAPs and worked with members of the DAB. The Imanishi-Kari case, in particular, demonstrated to me how important adversarial adjudication is for a fair and just outcome. Some critics attacked the RIAP process itself as unnecessary or lacking in expertise. I believe that the . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Investigation Alone Does Not Provide Adequate Due Process Guarantees

From the Department of Molecular Genetics and Biochemistry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pa.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Evaluation of the Research Norms of Scientists and Administrators Responsible for Academic Research Integrity
Stanley G. Korenman, Richard Berk, Neil S. Wenger, and Vivian Lew
JAMA. 1998;279(1):41-47.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Dealing with research misconduct in the United Kingdom • An American perspective on research integrity • Conduct unbecoming---the MRC's approach • An editor's response to fraudsters • Deception: difficulties and initiatives • Honest advice from Denmark
Rennie et al.
BMJ 1998;316:1726-1733.
FULL TEXT  

Standards for Scientific Behavior and Research Integrity
Jung et al.
JAMA 1998;279:1067-1068.
FULL TEXT