The Research Ethics Program serves as a resource for the campus community to identify and address ethical challenges intrinsic to the conduct of science, engineering, and other academic scholarship.

Case of the Month: September 2018

The research enterprise relies heavily on the premise that experts can best judge the merits of their peers' work. However, because those in the best position to act as peer reviewers are potentially competitors, the system risks bias and abuse due to conflicts of interest. One example of this is the possibility that a reviewer will discover something in a still unpublished manuscript that would cause her or him to re-think some of the work they are now doing.

If you are reviewing a manuscript and are convinced enough that you realize you should revise your experiment plans, should you do so? Are you allowed to do so?



Connect with us!