"Long before it's in the papers"
January 22, 2013

RETURN TO THE WORLD SCIENCE HOME PAGE

Men may commit more research fraud

Jan. 22, 2013
Courtesy of Albert Einstein College of Medicine
and World Science staff

Male sci­en­tists are more likely than fe­male ones to get caught put­ting out fraud­u­lent re­search find­ings, a study sug­gests.

“We need to bet­ter un­der­stand” this gen­der dif­fer­ence “in any ef­fort to pro­mote the in­tegr­ity of re­search,” said Ar­tu­ro Ca­sa­de­vall, a mi­cro­bi­ol­o­gist and im­mu­nol­o­gist at Al­bert Ein­stein Col­lege of Med­i­cine of Ye­shi­va Uni­vers­ity in New York. The fact that the ma­jor­ity of sci­en­tists are male is not suf­fi­cient to ex­plain the find­ings, he said.

Casade­vall is both sen­ior au­thor of the study and editor-in-chief of the re­search jour­nal, mBio, which pub­lished the pa­per in its Jan. 22 is­sue. The au­thors an­a­lyzed a sam­ple of fraud cases doc­u­mented by the U.S. Of­fice of Re­search In­tegr­ity, which in­ves­t­i­gates mis­con­duct charges in­volv­ing re­search funded by the U.S. De­part­ment of Health and Hu­man Ser­vic­es.

The num­bers showed that men com­mit­ted about 65 per­cent of the frauds in the life sci­ences, Ca­sa­de­vall and col­leagues found. In cases in­volv­ing uni­vers­ity fac­ul­ty, they added, men com­mit­ted about 88 per­cent, al­though they only rep­re­sented about 63 per­cent of the sci­ence fac­ul­ty mem­bers.

More than just under­mi­ning the sci­entific enter­prise as a whole, “mis­con­duct at high levels may con­trib­ute to at­tri­tion of wo­men from the se­nior ranks of aca­demic re­search­ers,” the auth­ors warned.

The sam­ple used was “a rel­a­tively small database,” they added, but it “may rep­re­sent the most re­li­a­ble in­forma­t­ion cur­rently avail­able.” 

The database in­clud­ed 215 cases of fraud. Of these, 40 per­cent in­volved trainees, 32 per­cent in­volved fac­ul­ty mem­bers, and 28 per­cent in­volved oth­er re­search per­son­nel, Ca­sa­de­vall and col­leagues wrote. In each ca­reer cat­e­go­ry, they added, the pro­por­tion of males com­mit­ting mis­con­duct was great­er than would have been pre­dicted from the gen­der dis­tri­bu­tion of sci­en­tists. The study did­n’t look in­to why.

“As re­search has shown, males tend to be risk tak­ers, more so than fe­ma­les, and to com­mit fraud en­tails tak­ing a risk,” said Ca­sa­de­vall. “It may al­so be that males are more com­pet­i­tive, or that wom­en are more sen­si­tive to the threat of sanc­tions. I think the best an­swer is that we don’t know. Now that we have doc­u­mented the prob­lem, we can beg­in a se­ri­ous dis­cus­sion about what is go­ing on and what can be done about it.”

The re­search­ers had hy­poth­e­sized that the ma­jor­ity of cases of mis­con­duct would in­volve trainees, who face in­tense pres­sure to pub­lish – a crit­i­cal step to­ward ob­tain­ing re­search funds. But they found that mis­con­duct was spread rath­er evenly across the ca­reer spec­trum. “You might think that as sci­en­tists go up the ca­reer lad­der, they would feel more se­cure. But the big­ger the lab you run, the more grants you need, which in­creases the pres­sures to pub­lish and the tempta­t­ion to cheat,” he not­ed.

“Right now we tar­get trainees for eth­ics train­ing,” he added. “We don’t do an­ything af­ter they are hired. It might help if uni­vers­i­ties re­quired re­fresh­er cours­es in eth­ics, as they do with cours­es to pre­vent sex­u­al har­ass­ment in the work­place. It won’t stop all mis­con­duct, but it’s one place to start.”

* * *

Male scientists are more likely than female ones to get caught putting out fraudulent research findings, a study has found. “We need to better understand” this gender difference “in any effort to promote the integrity of research,” said Arturo Casadevall, a microbiologist and immunologist at Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University in New York. The fact that the majority of scientists are male was not sufficient to explain the findings, he said. Casadevall is both senior author of the study and editor-in-chief of the research journal, mBio, which published the paper in its Jan. 22 issue. The authors analyzed a sample of fraud cases documented by the U.S. Office of Research Integrity, which investigates misconduct charges involving research funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The numbers showed that men committed about 65 percent of the frauds in the life sciences, Casedevall and colleagues found. In cases involving university faculty, they added, men committed about 88 percent, although they only represented about 63 percent of the science faculty members. The sample used was “a relatively small database,” the authors wrote, but it “may represent the most reliable information currently available.” The database included 215 cases of fraud. Of these, 40 percent involved trainees, 32 percent involved faculty members, and 28 percent involved other research personnel, Casadevall and colleagues wrote. In each career category, they added, the proportion of males committing misconduct was greater than would have been predicted from the gender distribution of scientists. The study didn’t look into why. “As research has shown, males tend to be risk takers, more so than females, and to commit fraud entails taking a risk,” said Casadevall. “It may also be that males are more competitive, or that women are more sensitive to the threat of sanctions. I think the best answer is that we don’t know. Now that we have documented the problem, we can begin a serious discussion about what is going on and what can be done about it.” The researchers had hypothesized that the majority of cases of misconduct would involve trainees, who face intense pressure to publish – a critical step toward obtaining research funds. But they found that misconduct was spread rather evenly across the career spectrum. “You might think that as scientists go up the career ladder, they would feel more secure. But the bigger the lab you run, the more grants you need, which increases the pressures to publish and the temptation to cheat,” he noted. “Right now we target trainees for ethics training,” he added. “We don’t do anything after they are hired. It might help if universities required refresher courses in ethics, as they do with courses to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace. It won’t stop all misconduct, but it’s one place to start.”