You are currently reviewing an older revision of this page.

Background

Key Ideas

Different sources use terms like “research ethics," “research integrity," and “responsible conduct of research" in varying and often conflicting ways. WRAIR's REI team uses the following definitions:

  • Research Ethics: Standards essential for protecting the rights and interests of those affected by research.

  • Research Integrity: Standards essential for the successful production of scientific knowledge through research.

  • Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR): Active adherence to the highest standards of research ethics and research integrity.
  • Research Misconduct: Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. (Research misconduct does not include honest errors or differences of opinion.) (DoDI 3210.7, Research Integrity and Misconduct, p. 7)

  • Detrimental Research Practices (DRPs): Research practices other than fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism that are clearly detrimental to the research process. (NASEM 2017, Fostering Integrity in Research, p. 25)

Discussion

The key ideas above are fundamentally about doing good science. Science is most efficient, effective, and impactful when it is conducted according to the highest standards of research ethics and research integrity. Laws and regulations have a role to play in promoting high-quality research, but responsible conduct of research goes beyond mere compliance or risk management. Research ethics and integrity standards favor:

  • Scientific best practices for conducting research
  • Reliability and quality of research
  • Respect for colleagues, participants, society, ecosystems, culture, and the environment
  • Accountability for research from idea conception to publication

Research ethics and integrity issues can be complex, hard to recognize, or ambiguous. Both individual and systems-level approaches are needed. Studies show that although only 2% of scientists admit to engaging in research misconduct and 14% observed it in colleagues, up to 34% of scientists engage in detrimental research practices (DRPs), while up to 72% observed it in colleagues (Fanelli 2009, How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research?, p. 1).

DISCLAIMER: The Walter Reed Army Institute of Research has reviewed this material and there is no objection to its presentation or publication. The opinions or assertions contained herein are the authors’ private views and do not necessarily reflect the policies or positions of the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research, Defense Health Agency, Department of the Army, or Department of Defense.