Skip to Main Content Skip to Footer
Home
Toggle Navigation Menu menu

Research misconduct policy

Policy: Linfield University expects all faculty, staff, and students to maintain the highest standards of integrity and ethical behavior in pursuing research (research encompasses research, scholarship and creative activities). While breaches in such standards are rare, these must be dealt with promptly and fairly by all parties in order to preserve the research integrity of our community and this University. The following set of procedures, informed by federal regulations (42 CFR Parts 50 and 93), will be enacted in response to any alleged misconduct by a Linfield employee. 

Definitions:

Research misconduct –

  • Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research or in reporting research results. This does not include honest errors or differences of opinion.
  • Retaliation of any kind against a person who has reported or provided information about suspected or alleged misconduct and who has not acted in bad faith.
  • Serious misappropriation of research funds, including but not limited to the diversion of such funds to personal or non-college use.

Complainant – The person who in good faith makes an allegation of research misconduct.

Respondent – The person against whom an allegation of research misconduct is directed or who is the subject of a research misconduct proceeding.

Research Integrity Officer – The person responsible for addressing research integrity conduct issues. At Linfield, this is the Vice President for Academic Affairs, who has primary responsibility for the implementation of the procedures set forth below.

Inquiry: Whenever a suspected case of scientific misconduct arises, the particulars are to be reported immediately to the Research Integrity Officer (RIO). The RIO or a delegate will promptly initiate a preliminary inquiry to determine whether or not there is sufficient evidence of possible misconduct to conduct a formal investigation of the charges against the respondent. The inquiry and written report shall be completed within 60 days of receipt of the allegation.

Investigation: If an inquiry of alleged scientific misconduct provides sufficient basis for conducting a full investigation, such investigation shall begin within 30 days of the completion of the inquiry, and shall be completed, including preparation of the written final report, no later than 120 days after it is begun.

The investigatory panel shall consist of four persons: an Associate Dean of Faculty, Chair of the respondent’s Division, a faculty member chosen by the RIO, and a faculty member chosen by the respondent. The two faculty members should be persons familiar with the discipline in which the alleged misconduct has arisen, but must not be persons who have been involved in the conduct of the research project or who have any other apparent conflict of interest. The need for impartiality and objectivity must be honored. The investigatory panel will be permitted to obtain the advice and testimony of experts, either from within or without the College, when that becomes important to the proper conduct of an investigation.

Respondent’s Rights: A respondent must be notified of an inquiry and/or investigation and be given the opportunity to provide written comments on any inquiry and investigative reports. In the case of an investigation, comments must be submitted within 30 days of the date the report was received by the respondent and must be reviewed by the investigatory panel before issuing a final report.

Requirements for Findings: A finding of research misconduct requires that (1) there be a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community; and (2) the misconduct be committed intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly; and (3) the allegation be proven by a preponderance of the evidence.

Sanctions: When an investigation confirms that scientific misconduct has occurred, the President will be informed of the details and will impose appropriate sanctions.

Appeals: The respondent may appeal the investigatory panel’s findings within 30 days of notification. The grounds for appeal should be limited to failure to follow appropriate procedures. The President will, in consultation with the Faculty Executive Council, choose an appeals panel of three tenured faculty members who were not members of the original panel. The appeals panel is advisory to the President and makes its recommendations to him or her. The President's decision is final.

Confidentiality: The College shall maintain the identity of respondents and complainants securely and confidentially and shall not disclose any identifying information, except: (1) to the extent required by law; (2) to those who need to know in order to carry out a thorough, competent, objective and fair research misconduct proceeding; and (3) to the cognizant funding agency, if any, as necessary and as it conducts its review of the research misconduct proceeding and any subsequent proceedings.

Records: At the outset of an inquiry, the Research Integrity Officer will attempt to obtain and sequester all pertinent records and evidence to conduct a research misconduct proceeding. Written records shall be kept of each inquiry and its result, and of each subsequent investigation and its result. These records and all appropriate documentation shall be kept securely on file in the Dean’s Office for seven years after completion of any institutional or federal agency proceeding, whichever is later. These records must be provided upon request to any federal agency which provided funding for research projects related to the alleged scientific misconduct.

Reporting: When an inquiry into an allegation of scientific misconduct results in a finding that there is cause for a full investigation, any external agency which provided funding for a research project related to the alleged scientific misconduct will be promptly notified that an investigation is to be conducted. Furthermore, the particular misconduct guidelines of that agency will be followed. The University will cooperate with the funding agency to protect unexpended funds and to ensure that the purposes for which funding was provided are being carried out. When an investigation of alleged scientific misconduct discloses facts that are relevant to the consideration of pending requests for continued research funding from an external agency, those facts will be conveyed to that agency promptly. If evidence of criminal wrongdoing is found, that evidence will be forwarded to the agency within 24 hours. At the completion of an investigation into alleged scientific misconduct, a full written report which thoroughly documents the investigative process and findings will be sent to any agency which funded research related to the case. A report will also be provided to the respondent.

Interim Protective Actions: At any time during a research misconduct proceeding, the University shall take appropriate interim actions to protect the public health, federal and other grant funds and equipment, and the integrity of the supported research process. The necessary actions will vary according to the circumstance of each case, but examples of the actions that may be necessary include delaying the publication of research results, providing for closer supervision of one or more researchers, requiring approvals for actions relating to the research that did not previously require approval, auditing pertinent records, or taking steps to contact other institutions that may be affected by an allegation of research misconduct.

Protection of Individuals: The College will take precautions against real or apparent conflicts of interest among persons involved in an inquiry or investigation. It will undertake diligent efforts, as appropriate, to restore the reputations of respondents alleged to have engaged in misconduct when allegations are not confirmed, and also undertake diligent efforts to protect the positions and reputations of complainants who, in good faith, make allegations.

Dissemination of Policy: The RIO will electronically distribute this policy annually to all faculty at Linfield College.

Sources for this Policy and Guide: 42 CFR Parts 50 and 93 and policies from Amherst College, Colgate University, Hope College, Middlebury College, and Smith College.