Factors related to the severity of research misconduct administrative actions: An analysis of office of research integrity case summaries from 1993 to 2023

ABSTRACT

We extracted, coded, and analyzed data from 343 Office of Research Integrity (ORI) case summaries published in the Federal Register and other venues from May 1993 to July 2023 to test hypotheses concerning the relationship between the severity of ORI administrative actions and various demographic and institutional factors. We found that factors indicative of the severity of the respondent’s misconduct or a pattern of misbehavior were associated with the severity of ORI administrative actions. Being required by ORI to retract or correct publications and aggravating factors, such as interfering with an investigation, were both positively associated with receiving a funding debarment and with receiving an administrative action longer than three years. Admitting one’s guilt and being found to have committed plagiarism (only) were negatively associated with receiving a funding debarment but were neither positively nor negatively associated with receiving an administrative action longer than three years. Other factors, such as the respondent’s race/ethnicity, gender, academic position, administrative position, or their institution’s NIH funding level or extramural vs. intramural or foreign vs. US status, were neither positively nor negatively associated with the severity of administrative actions. Overall, our findings suggest that ORI has acted fairly when imposing administrative actions on respondents and has followed DHHS guidelines.

KEYWORDS:

• Research misconduct
• office of research integrity
• punishment
• retractions
• corrections

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Author contributions

Research conception and design: DBR, FF, MD.

Data collection, coding, and extraction: AG, BL, BRL, SL, DBR

Data analysis: MS

Data interpretation: DBR, MS, FF, MD

Writing the first draft of the manuscript: DBR

Notes

1. Although the courts have not addressed the issue of whether these criteria could mention race or ethnicity, it is very likely that they would rule that they cannot because administrative actions taken in response to research misconduct are punitive and it is unconstitutional to use race or ethnicity as a factor in criminal sentencing (Joyner 1982).

2. We will not analyze the notion of what makes a punishment “fit” the crime other than to observe that the severity of punishment should be proportional to the severity of the crime. For further discussion, see (Edwards 2018).

Additional information

Funding

This research was supported by the Intramural Program of the NIH. It does not represent the views of the NIH or US government.