University Policy
Title
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Policy on Responding to Allegations of Research Misconduct
Introduction
Purpose
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (“University”) is committed to the responsible and ethical conduct of research. This policy outlines the University’s process for responding to Allegations of Research Misconduct as defined in the "Definitions" section and ensures compliance with applicable federal regulations and institutional policies governing academic research.
The purpose of this policy is to protect the integrity of academic research and research training conducted under the auspices of the University; to support a culture of honesty, rigor and transparency during the proposing, performing, reviewing of research, or in reporting research results; and to maintain public confidence in the University’s research enterprise.
Scope
This policy applies to all individuals of the University community ("Covered Individuals") engaged in research or research training across all disciplines and under the auspices of the University. Covered Individuals include:
- Faculty;
- Staff (SHRA and EHRA non-faculty);
- Students;
- Guest researchers (e.g., unpaid volunteers, interns, and visiting scholars);
- Collaborators; and
- Consultants.
This policy also applies to subawardees and/or subcontractors involved with University research or research training (see Section G). It governs all research regardless of where the alleged Research Misconduct occurred or the source of financial support.
Other forms of misconduct that may arise in the research setting are governed by separate University policies.
Policy
General Principles
A. Responsibility to Reduce the Risk of Research Misconduct
Each member of the University community is responsible for :
- Complying with this policy;
- Supporting their research colleagues and collaborators in avoiding actions that may violate this policy.
B. Responsibility to Report Research Misconduct
Any Covered Individual who in good faith suspects Research Misconduct is required to report their concern(s) through one or more of the following channels:
- Informing their unit leadership (e.g., department chair, research dean or dean),
- Informing an equivalent leader, such as an Institute or Center director,
- Reporting through the University’s Carolina Ethics Line hotline, or
- Contacting the Institutional Research Integrity Officer ("RIO").
C. Cooperation with Research Misconduct Proceedings
Covered Individuals are required to fully cooperate with the RIO and other University officials during any Assessment, Inquiry, or Investigation of Allegations of Research Misconduct. This includes providing all relevant Research Records and evidence to the RIO during the Research Misconduct Proceedings (“proceedings”).
D. Confidentiality
Research Misconduct Proceedings are considered confidential personnel matters. The RIO is responsible for informing committee members, witnesses, and all other individuals involved in the proceedings of their obligation to maintain confidentiality.
The RIO must make reasonable efforts to protect the confidentiality of Respondents, Complainants, and other relevant individuals, such as witnesses and research participants identifiable from research records or evidence. Disclosure of information should be limited to individuals with a legitimate need to know consistent with a thorough, competent, objective, and fair Research Misconduct proceeding, except as required by law or sponsor requirements.
E. Precautions to Protect Against Conflicts of Interest
The University and RIO must take reasonable steps to ensure that all individuals involved in any part of the proceedings are impartial and free from bias or prejudice. These individuals include, but are not limited to:
- Individuals who are involved during the Inquiry and Investigation, e.g., appointed committee members and subject matter experts,
- Deciding Officials, and
- University officials.
Additionally, the University and RIO will also take precautions to ensure that the individuals responsible for carrying out any part of the Research Misconduct Proceeding do not have any unresolved real or apparent personal, professional, or financial conflicts of interest related to the Research Misconduct Proceeding.
F. Interim Administrative Actions and Notifying External Sponsors of Special Circumstances
During a Research Misconduct Proceeding, the RIO must assess whether public health or safety may be at risk. This responsibility includes:
- Protecting human or animal subjects.
- Identifying potential violations of civil or criminal law.
- Safeguarding sponsored funds and equipment.
- Preserving the integrity of externally supported research.
- Protecting University resources, staff, students, and trainees.
If the RIO determines public health or safety is at risk, they must coordinate with the appropriate University officials and sponsors to take or recommend actions to prevent harm.
Examples of actions include, but are not limited to:
- Increased monitoring of the research process and management of external funds and equipment.
- Reassigning personnel or responsibility.
- Removing the Respondent from the research in question.
- Conducting additional review of research records and results.
- Delaying dissemination of research results (e.g., publication).
The RIO must also notify external sponsors as required to alert them of potential risks to public health or safety and describe the steps that were taken to mitigate those risks.
G. Additional Responsibilities of Subawardees and Subcontractors
Recipients of subawards, subcontracts or other research agreements from the University must promptly evaluate and address any Allegation of Research Misconduct related to work conducted under these agreements in accordance with their own institutional policies, applicable federal regulations, and sponsor requirements when conducting Assessments, Inquiries, and Investigations.
The University reserves the right to conduct its own review or take additional action when the Allegation involves University researchers, funds, data, or other resources.
H. Consequences for Violating this Policy and Related Procedure
Violation of this policy or its related procedures constitute a breach of the trust within the University community. Alleged violations will be addressed through the steps outlined in the Procedure for Responding to Allegations of Research Misconduct.
Exceptions
None.
Definitions
- Allegation - This term is a disclosure of possible Research Misconduct through any means of communication and brought directly to the attention of the University.
- Assessment - Assessment means a consideration of whether an Allegation of Research Misconduct appears to fall within the definition of Research Misconduct; appears to involve academic research, e.g., biomedical or behavioral research, biomedical or behavioral research training, or activities related to that research or research training; and is sufficiently credible and specific so that potential evidence of Research Misconduct may be identified. The Assessment only involves the review of readily accessible information relevant to the Allegation.
- Complainant - Complainant means an individual who in good faith makes an allegation of research misconduct.
- Covered Individuals - All individuals engaged in research or research training across all disciplines and under the auspices of the University. Covered Individuals include: faculty; staff (SHRA and EHRA non-faculty); students; guest researchers (e.g., unpaid volunteers, interns, and visiting scholars); collaborators; and consultants.
- Fabrication - Fabrication means making up data or results and recording or reporting them.
- Falsification - Falsification means manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.
- Inquiry - Inquiry means preliminary information-gathering and preliminary fact-finding to determine if an Investigation is warranted.
- Investigation - Investigation means the formal development of a factual record and the examination of that record to determine whether or not Research Misconduct occurred.
- Plagiarism - Plagiarism means the appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words, without giving appropriate credit. (a) Plagiarism includes the unattributed verbatim or nearly verbatim copying of sentences and paragraphs from another’s work that materially misleads the reader regarding the contributions of the author. It does not include the limited use of identical or nearly identical phrases that describe a commonly used methodology. (b) Plagiarism does not include self-plagiarism or authorship or credit disputes, including disputes among former collaborators who participated jointly in the development or conduct of a research project. Self-plagiarism and authorship disputes do not meet the definition of research misconduct.
- Research Misconduct – Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. Research Misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.
- Research Misconduct Proceeding - Research misconduct proceeding means any actions related to alleged Research Misconduct, including Allegation Assessments, Inquiries, and Investigations.
- Research Records - Research record means the record of data or results that embody the facts resulting from scientific inquiry. Data or results may be in physical or electronic form. Examples of items, materials, or information that may be considered part of the research record include, but are not limited to, research proposals, raw data, processed data, clinical research records, laboratory records, study records, laboratory notebooks, progress reports, manuscripts, abstracts, theses, records of oral presentations, online content, lab meeting reports, and journal articles.
- Respondent - Respondent means the individual against whom an Allegation of Research Misconduct is directed or who is the subject of a Research Misconduct Proceeding
Related Requirements
External Regulations
University Policies, Standards, and Procedures
Contact Information
Primary Contact
Name: Eric Everett
Title: Institutional Research Integrity Officer
Unit: Office of the Vice Chancellor for Research
Phone: 919-962-0988