Both Whistleblowers and the Scientists They Accuse Are Vulnerable and Deserve Protection

Lex M. Bouter, Sven Hendrix

Research output: Contribution to JournalComment / Letter to the editorAcademic

Abstract

Whistleblowers play an important role diagnosing research misconduct, but often experience severe negative consequences. That is also true for incorrectly accused scientists. Both categories are vulnerable and deserve protection. Whistleblowers must proceed carefully and cautiously. Anonymous whistleblowing should be discouraged but cannot be ignored when the allegations are specific, serious, and plausible. When accused of a breach of research integrity it is important to be as transparent as possible. Sometimes accusations are false in the sense that the accuser knows or should know that the allegations are untrue. A mala fide whistleblower typically does not act carefully and we postulate a typology that may help in detecting them. Striking the right balance between whistleblower protection and timely unmasking false and identifying incorrect accusations is a tough dilemma leaders of research institutions have to face.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)359-366
Number of pages8
JournalAccountability in Research
Volume24
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 18 Aug 2017

Fingerprint

accused
integrity
typology
leader
experience

Keywords

  • Research fraud
  • research integrity
  • research misconduct
  • whistleblowing

Cite this

@article{c2a6cc22ec9b49cf8f5f35914b56d511,
title = "Both Whistleblowers and the Scientists They Accuse Are Vulnerable and Deserve Protection",
abstract = "Whistleblowers play an important role diagnosing research misconduct, but often experience severe negative consequences. That is also true for incorrectly accused scientists. Both categories are vulnerable and deserve protection. Whistleblowers must proceed carefully and cautiously. Anonymous whistleblowing should be discouraged but cannot be ignored when the allegations are specific, serious, and plausible. When accused of a breach of research integrity it is important to be as transparent as possible. Sometimes accusations are false in the sense that the accuser knows or should know that the allegations are untrue. A mala fide whistleblower typically does not act carefully and we postulate a typology that may help in detecting them. Striking the right balance between whistleblower protection and timely unmasking false and identifying incorrect accusations is a tough dilemma leaders of research institutions have to face.",
keywords = "Research fraud, research integrity, research misconduct, whistleblowing",
author = "Bouter, {Lex M.} and Sven Hendrix",
year = "2017",
month = "8",
day = "18",
doi = "10.1080/08989621.2017.1327814",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "359--366",
journal = "Accountability in Research",
issn = "0898-9621",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "6",

}

Both Whistleblowers and the Scientists They Accuse Are Vulnerable and Deserve Protection. / Bouter, Lex M.; Hendrix, Sven.

In: Accountability in Research, Vol. 24, No. 6, 18.08.2017, p. 359-366.

Research output: Contribution to JournalComment / Letter to the editorAcademic

TY - JOUR

T1 - Both Whistleblowers and the Scientists They Accuse Are Vulnerable and Deserve Protection

AU - Bouter, Lex M.

AU - Hendrix, Sven

PY - 2017/8/18

Y1 - 2017/8/18

N2 - Whistleblowers play an important role diagnosing research misconduct, but often experience severe negative consequences. That is also true for incorrectly accused scientists. Both categories are vulnerable and deserve protection. Whistleblowers must proceed carefully and cautiously. Anonymous whistleblowing should be discouraged but cannot be ignored when the allegations are specific, serious, and plausible. When accused of a breach of research integrity it is important to be as transparent as possible. Sometimes accusations are false in the sense that the accuser knows or should know that the allegations are untrue. A mala fide whistleblower typically does not act carefully and we postulate a typology that may help in detecting them. Striking the right balance between whistleblower protection and timely unmasking false and identifying incorrect accusations is a tough dilemma leaders of research institutions have to face.

AB - Whistleblowers play an important role diagnosing research misconduct, but often experience severe negative consequences. That is also true for incorrectly accused scientists. Both categories are vulnerable and deserve protection. Whistleblowers must proceed carefully and cautiously. Anonymous whistleblowing should be discouraged but cannot be ignored when the allegations are specific, serious, and plausible. When accused of a breach of research integrity it is important to be as transparent as possible. Sometimes accusations are false in the sense that the accuser knows or should know that the allegations are untrue. A mala fide whistleblower typically does not act carefully and we postulate a typology that may help in detecting them. Striking the right balance between whistleblower protection and timely unmasking false and identifying incorrect accusations is a tough dilemma leaders of research institutions have to face.

KW - Research fraud

KW - research integrity

KW - research misconduct

KW - whistleblowing

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85019745368&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85019745368&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/08989621.2017.1327814

DO - 10.1080/08989621.2017.1327814

M3 - Comment / Letter to the editor

VL - 24

SP - 359

EP - 366

JO - Accountability in Research

JF - Accountability in Research

SN - 0898-9621

IS - 6

ER -