Context-Dependent Criminalization of Acts of Research Misconduct – Bypassing the FFP Demarcation Problem with a Two-Tier Academic and Criminal-Legal Investigational Structure

Abstract

What is new?

A prominent issue that hampers criminalization of scientific or research misconduct (RM) is the criminal demarcation problem. Criminalization is often deemed to be applicable to widely adopted core RM acts of fabrication, falsification and plagiarism (FFP). However, it has been argued that this FFP limit or demarcation might be unwieldy, being potentially either under-inclusive or overly exclusive.

What was the approach?

Here, I suggest that constructing technical boundaries for RM criminalization is neither critical nor useful. The criminal nature of an act of RM would be better defined by its intent, imposed risk, consequences, severity of harm to others, as well as whether it violates prevailing laws. Albeit small in number, perpetrators of egregious acts of RM, both within the FFP realm or otherwise, have indeed been punished by the state. Criminalizing egregious acts of RM is within the current academic and legal capacity of most research-active nations and can be facilitated by a proposed dual or two-tier academic and criminal-legal investigational structure.

What is the academic impact?

In close communication and collaboration with academia that would provide domain expertise to navigate the technical intricacies of a case of RM, the legal system can then seamlessly and effectively institute follow-up criminal prosecutions if and when appropriate. This two-tier academic and criminal-legal investigational structure would enhance investigational coverage and efficacy.

What is the wider impact?

The two-tier academic and criminal-legal investigational framework might also be applicable to other forms of misdemeanour or fraud by those within the academia.