According to Professor Melissa Anderson from the University of Minnesota, instructions and mentoring could, in many instances, have the opposite effect.

“Instruction promotes familiarity with policies but shows little effect on attitudes or subsequent misconduct and questionable research practices whereas mentoring has both positive and negative impacts on behaviour,” she said.

Anderson told the first World Conference on Research Integrity in Lisbon that being mentored on ethics and research lowers the odds that an early-career scientist will engage in misconduct and questionable research practices, but being mentored and lectured on the pressure and competitiveness of the science field could raise the number of cases of research misconduct.

“An atmosphere of cooperation does indeed diminish the likelihood of engagement in misbehaviour. However, a sense of competition increases misbehaviour,” said Anderson.

For the three-year study, Anderson surveyed nearly 1500 early-career and 1800 mid-career students about receiving instructions or mentoring on ethical issues in research. The result surprised even Anderson, as she expected to see that mentoring and ethical teaching would result in increased performance.
However, Anderson insisted training on ethics is useful, but better instruction practice and teaching methodology are needed.

“We need a collective openness in the research culture, and an atmosphere where people are feeling comfortable in rising questions,” she said.

The World Conference on Research Integrity took place last month in an effort to address the need for fighting fraud, forgery and plagiarism in science world-wide. The event was initiated and organised by the European Science Foundation (ESF) and the US Office for Research Integrity (ORI).