What does this role involve?
It is a confidential advisory role covering the full range of scientific integrity concerns, from uncertainty about whether a practice is appropriate to more serious allegations of misconduct. Anyone within FGB can come to me, whether the concern involves their own work or someone else's. My first function is to listen.
Why are you motivated to take on this role?
Over the years, in my roles as a journal editor, PhD advisor, and section head, I have encountered many challenging situations within science, and I have seen considerable energy directed toward resolving issues that fall under the broad umbrella of integrity concerns. Those involved did not always have a confidential contact point from which to seek guidance. I want to be that contact point for my colleagues to share what I have learned navigating these situations, and to help them think through problems of scientific integrity.
What do you see as a challenge?
Many undesirable behaviors are not clear-cut research integrity violations, and many research integrity violations are not clear-cut scientific misconduct. Consider, for example, co-authorship disputes, the legitimacy of data-cleaning decisions, and the definition of researcher degrees of freedom. Some difficult situations are best resolved without formal processes. Others involve serious scientific integrity violations that do require formal processes. The line between these categories is not always obvious. But it’s important to get this categorization right.
What are your goals for this role?
My goal is to help people understand their situation clearly and to ensure they are aware of all options available to them, whether formal or informal. I want to offer a confidential setting in without pressuring them to pursue any particular outcome. And, of course, I want to guide them through whichever option ends up being most appropriate for them.