University of Wisconsin-River Falls Academic Policy Paper
Policies and Procedures on Scientific Misconduct
Recognizing that honesty in the conduct of academic research is fundamental to its
integrity and credibility and to the maintenance of public trust in the university, the UW-River
Falls adopts these policies and procedures for reviewing and investigating allegations of
scientific misconduct.
Faculty and staff are reminded that Chapter UWS 8 of the Wisconsin Administrative
Code, the Unclassified Staff Code of Ethics, provides that:
Every member of the faculty and academic staff at the time of appointment
makes a personal commitment to professional honesty and integrity that meets
the demanding standards of the state and national academic communities.
Students are reminded that Chapter UWS 14, Student Academic Disciplinary Procedures,
provide under Statement of Principles:
The board of regents, administrators, faculty, academic staff and students of the
university of Wisconsin system believe that academic honesty and integrity are
fundamental to the mission of higher education and of the university of
Wisconsin system. The university has a responsibility to promote academic
honesty and integrity and to develop procedures to deal effectively with
instances of academic dishonesty. Students are responsible for the honest
completion and representation of their work for the appropriate citation of
sources, and for respect of others' academic endeavors. Students who violate
these standards must be confronted and must accept the consequences of their
actions.
Policy and Definition
For purposes of these policies and procedures, "misconduct in science" or
"misconduct" means fabrication, falsification, plagiarism or other practices that seriously
deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing,
conducting, or reporting research. It does not include honest error or honest differences in
interpretations or judgements of data.
Misconduct in science is prohibited at UW-River Falls, and may be cause for discipline
or dismissal.
Misuse by a researcher of University funds (including grant and contract funding from
extramural sponsors) is also cause for discipline or dismissal and may be cause for criminal
prosecution. However, an allegation of misuse of funds is not within the scope of this policy;
such allegation shall be referred to the Vice Chancellor who will consult with the Controller
concerning an appropriate course of action.
A violation of institutional procedures or federal regulations on the protection of human
or animal research subjects or a violation of state or federal safety laws or regulations is also
not within the scope of this policy. An allegation regarding any such violation shall be
promptly referred to the chair of the Institutional Review Board in cases involving human
subjects, to the chair of the Animal Care Committee in cases involving animal subjects, or to
the Chancellor in cases involving safety.
The goal of the procedures outlined below is to assure the integrity of scholarly
research, to achieve a rapid and equitable resolution of all charges and to assure that all parties
are treated with fairness. In order to protect the reputation of an innocent party, the
procedures will preserve the maximum level of confidentiality consistent with law and with
justice for all parties to these procedures. All parties will take whatever action is required to
avoid any unnecessary conflict of interest.
Where an inquiry or investigation results in a finding that no misconduct has occurred,
the University will not institute a new inquiry or investigation into an allegation of misconduct
where the allegation is made against the same person and is based on material facts which were
reviewed and found not to constitute misconduct during the prior inquiry or investigation,
unless new material evidence is presented by a different complainant, or unless the person who
is the subject of the inquiry or investigation requests another proceeding.
Because of the difficulties of assessing stale claims and the unfairness to the person
against whom the allegation is made, allegations based on conduct which occurred seven years
or more prior to the making of the allegation will not be inquired into under this policy unless
the circumstances indicate that the alleged conduct was not discoverable earlier.
Procedures
(1) Inquiry upon allegation or other evidence of possible misconduct.
(a) Informal allegations or reports of possible misconduct in science shall be directed
initially to the person with immediate responsibility for the work of the individual
against whom the allegations or reports have been made. The person receiving such an
informal report or allegation is responsible for either resolving the matter or
encouraging the submission of a formal allegation or report. Upon receipt of formal
allegations or reports of scientific misconduct, the person with immediate responsibility
for the work of the individual against whom the allegations or reports have been made
shall immediately inform, in writing, the Vice Chancellor.
(b) The Vice Chancellor shall appoint an individual or individuals to conduct a prompt
inquiry into the allegation or report of misconduct.
1. The individual or individuals conducting the inquiry shall prepare a written
report for the Vice Chancellor describing the evidence reviewed, summarizing
relevant interviews and including the conclusions of the inquiry.
2. The inquiry must be completed within 60 calendar days of its initiation
unless circumstances clearly warrant a longer period. If the inquiry takes longer
than 60 days to complete, the reasons for exceeding the 60-day period shall be
documented and included with the record.
3. The individual against whom the allegation was made shall be given a copy
of the report of the inquiry by the Vice Chancellor, and shall have an
opportunity to respond to the report within 10 days of receipt. Any response
must be in writing, and will become a part of the record of the inquiry.
4. To protect the privacy and reputation of all individuals involved, including
the individual in good faith reporting possible misconduct and the individual
against whom the report is made, information concerning the initial report, the
inquiry and any resulting investigation shall be kept confidential and shall be
released only to those having a legitimate need to know about the matter.
(c) If the inquiry concludes that the allegation of misconduct is unsubstantiated and an
investigation is not warranted, the reasons and supporting documentation for this
conclusion shall be reported to the Vice Chancellor, who shall be responsible for
reviewing the conclusion of the inquiry. If the Vice Chancellor concurs in the
conclusion that an investigation is not warranted, his or her determination, and all other
supporting documentation from the inquiry shall be recorded and the record maintained
confidentially for a period of three years after the termination of the inquiry. If the
inquiry or the Vice Chancellor determines that an investigation is warranted, the
procedures in paragraph (2) shall be followed.
(2) Investigation of reported misconduct in science.
(a) If an investigation is determined to be warranted under paragraph (1), the Vice
Chancellor shall so inform the Chancellor. The Chancellor shall immediately appoint a
committee to conduct the investigation. The committee shall be composed of impartial faculty
members possessing appropriate competence and research expertise for the conduct of the
investigation, and no faculty member having responsibility for the research under
investigation, or having any other conflict with the university's interest in securing a fair and
objective investigation, may serve on the investigating committee. If necessary, individuals
possessing the requisite competence and research expertise who are not affiliated with UW-River Falls may be asked to serve as consultants to the investigating committee.
(b) The investigation must be initiated within 30 days of the completion of the inquiry.
The investigation normally will include examination of all documentation, including but
not necessarily limited to relevant research data and proposals, publications,
correspondence, and memoranda of telephone calls. Interviews should be conducted of
all individuals involved either in making the allegation or against whom the allegation
is made, as well as others who might have information regarding key aspects of the
allegations. Summaries of interviews conducted shall be prepared, and provided to the
parties interviewed for their comment or revision. These summaries shall be made a
part of the record of the investigation.
(c) The individual making the allegation, the individual against whom the allegation is
made, and all others having relevant information shall cooperate fully with the work of
the investigating committee, and shall make available all relevant documents and
materials associated with the research under investigations.
(d) The investigation should ordinarily be completed within 60 days of its initiation
unless conditions warrant a longer period. This includes conducting the investigation,
preparing the report of the findings, making that report available for comment by the
subjects of the investigation, and submitting the report to the Chancellor. If the
investigating committee determines that it cannot complete the investigation with the
120-day period, it shall submit to the Chancellor a written request for an extension
explaining the need for delay and providing an estimated date of completion. If the
research under investigation is funded by an agency within the Public Health Service
(PHS), the procedures under paragraph (3)(d) of this policy also apply.
(e) The report of the investigation should include a description of the policies and
procedures under which the investigation was conducted, information obtained and the
sources of such information, an accurate summary of the position of the individual
under investigation, the findings of committee, including the bases for its findings, and
the committee's recommendation to the Chancellor concerning whether the evidence of
scientific misconduct is sufficient to warrant discipline or dismissal under the applicable
faculty or academic staff personnel rules. All documentation substantiating the findings
and recommendation of the investigating committee, together with all other information
comprising the record of the investigation, shall be transmitted to the Chancellor with
the report, upon completion of the investigation.
(f) A copy of the investigating committee's report shall be provided to the individual
being investigated. The Chancellor or appropriate administrative officer shall afford
the individual under investigation an opportunity to discuss the matter prior to taking
action under paragraph (3) of this policy.
(3) Reporting to Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI) where research is funded by PHS grants.
Where research is funded by an agency within PHS:
(a) A determination that an investigation should be initiated under paragraph (1)(c)
must be reported in writing to the OSI Director on or before the date the investigation
begins. The notification should state the name of the individuals against whom the
allegations of scientific misconduct have been made, the general nature of the
allegations, and the PHS application or grant numbers involved.
(b) During the course of the investigation, the granting agency should be apprised of
any significant findings that might affect current or potential funding of the individual
under investigation or that might require agency interpretation of funding regulations.
(c) The OSI must be notified at any stage of an inquiry or investigation if the university
determines that any of the following conditions exist:
1. There is an immediate health hazard involved;
2. There is an immediate need to protect federal funds or equipment;
3. There is an immediate need to protect the interests of the person making the
allegations or of the individual who is the subject of the allegations as well as
his or her co-investigators and associates, if any;
4. It is probable that the alleged incident is going to be reported publicly;
5. There is a reasonable indication of possible criminal violation. In that
instance, the university must inform OSI within 24 hours of obtaining that
information.
(d) If the university is unable to complete the investigation within the 120-day period,
as described above, the Vice Chancellor must submit to OSI a written request for an
extension and an explanation of the delay, including an interim progress report and an
estimated date of completion of the investigation. If the request is granted, the
institution must file periodic progress reports as requested by the OSI. If satisfactory
progress is not made in the institution's investigation, the OSI may undertake an
investigation of its own.
(e) If the university plans to terminate an inquiry or investigation for any reason
without completing all the relevant requirements, a report of such planned termination,
including a description of the reasons for such termination, shall be make to OSI,
which will then decide whether further investigation should be undertaken.
(f) Upon completion of the investigation, UW-River Falls will notify OSI of the
outcome, in a report which shall include the information and documentation specified
in paragraph (2)(e) of this policy.
(4) Other action following completion of investigation.
(a) If the allegation of scientific misconduct is substantiated as a result of an
investigation, the Vice Chancellor shall notify the agency, if any, sponsoring the
research project of the result of the investigation. In such a case, the individual
involved will be asked to withdraw all pending abstracts and papers emanating from the
scientific misconduct, and the Vice Chancellor will notify editors of journals in which
relevant papers appeared. In addition, other institutions and sponsoring agencies with
which the individual has been affiliated shall be notified if, based on the results of the
investigation, it is believed that the validity of previous research by the individual
under investigation is questionable.
(b) Where scientific misconduct is substantiated, UW-River Falls will take appropriate
action, which may include discipline or dismissal, with regard to the employment status
of the individual or individuals involved. Applicable personnel rules, policies and
procedures set forth in Chapters UWS 4, 6, 11 and 13, Wisconsin Administrative Code
and related university policies shall govern discipline or dismissal actions resulting
from an investigation of scientific misconduct.
(c) Where allegations of scientific misconduct are not substantiated by the
investigation, UW-River Falls shall make diligent efforts, as appropriate, to restore the
reputations of persons alleged to have engaged in misconduct, and to protect the
positions and reputations of those person who, in good faith, make allegations.
Approved by UW-RF Faculty Senate, 9/30/92.
