Handling Misconduct and Meeting Legal Obligations, Explained

UPI Study › Courses › Research Methods in Psychology › Free lessons › Lesson 2.6 Free with a free account

Handling Misconduct and Meeting Legal Obligations

Research Methods in Psychology · Chapter 2: Ethics and Integrity in ResearchSection 2.6 · lesson 13 of 9410 min · free with a free account

← Avoiding Deception in ResearchNext lesson: The Role of IRBs in Protecting Research Participants →

Earn 3 college credits for Research Methods in PsychologyRecommended for credit by NCCRS · Psychology 111 · self-paced · one payment, lifetime access
Enroll in Research Methods in Psychology · $250 →Download the syllabus (PDF)

In this lesson

Responding to ethical violations and navigating legal requirements in research.

  • Define misconduct and separate it from honest error
  • Describe how allegations are reported and investigated
  • Identify the legal obligations that bind researchers
  • Explain mandatory reporting and the duty to warn

Free study notes

Get this lesson's notes by email

The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.

One email. Unsubscribe in one click.

Transcript

Everything said in the video, section by section (1,301 words). Read along, or search it.

Ethics and Integrity in Research

Misconduct and Legal Obligations

Every earlier section in this chapter described how research should go. This one describes what happens when it does not. Ethical failures occur even where the intentions were good. Some are honest mistakes. Others are deliberate, and the difference matters enormously. By the end you will define research misconduct, and separate it from honest error. You will describe how allegations get reported and investigated. You will identify the legal obligations that bind psychological researchers. And you will explain mandatory reporting, and the duty to warn. Two of those obligations can override confidentiality entirely. Knowing which ones, before you are in the room, is the point of this section.

When Ethics Fails

Honest Mistakes and Deliberate Acts

Despite the best intentions, ethical failures occur in research. Some are the result of honest mistakes. Misunderstandings of procedures, oversights, or errors of judgment. Others are deliberate. The fabrication of data. The suppression of findings. The exploitation of participants. Understanding the difference between honest error and misconduct is essential knowledge. So is knowing how to respond to each of them. The stakes here are not abstract. Research misconduct wastes resources, and misleads the scientific community. It may harm participants or the public, and it erodes trust in science. Early identification is the responsibility of every member of the research community.

The Definition

Fabrication, Falsification, Plagiarism

Start with the formal definition, because it is narrower than you might guess. The US Office of Research Integrity defines research misconduct as three things. Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism. Together, FFP. In proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. Fabrication is making up data or results, and reporting them as if they were real. Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes. So that the research results are not accurately represented. And plagiarism is appropriating another person's ideas, processes, results, or words, without giving appropriate credit. All three misrepresent the record in some way. One invents it, one distorts it, and one steals it.

Worked Examples

What Each One Looks Like

Definitions are easy to nod along to. Examples are harder to forget. Fabrication. Inventing participant responses for interviews that were never conducted. There was no participant, and there was no interview. Falsification. Removing outliers selectively, to produce a statistically significant result. Plagiarism. Presenting another researcher's unpublished work as your own in a grant application. Unpublished is doing a lot of work in that example. The original author may never see the document that took their idea. Now notice which of the three is hardest to spot. Fabrication and plagiarism are recognizable once someone actually looks. Falsification hides inside ordinary-looking analysis. The same action, taken selectively to manufacture significance, is what makes it misconduct.

Error Or Misconduct

Intent Is the Dividing Line

Not all errors are misconduct, and the distinction is not a technicality. An honest error arises from faulty reasoning, or bias, or poor data collection. Mistakes made without any intent to deceive. Research misconduct, by contrast, involves intentional deviation from accepted practices. Intent is the dividing line. And the classification you reach determines the response. Honest errors call for correction. Misconduct calls for formal investigation, and it may warrant sanctions. Getting that call wrong in either direction does real damage. Treat misconduct as an error and it continues. Treat an error as misconduct and the response is wildly disproportionate.

The Gray Zone

Questionable Research Practices

Between clear misconduct and honest error lies a gray zone. It is occupied by questionable research practices. These are not universally classified as misconduct. But they still threaten the integrity of the scientific record. The list includes HARKing, and p-hacking. Selective reporting of outcomes, and the failure to publish null results. What those four share is timing. The decision about what to report comes after the results are already known. Now the part that makes them dangerous. These practices may be widespread in some fields. Widespread does not mean harmless. Their cumulative effect on scientific knowledge is substantial.

Raising A Concern

How an Allegation Is Handled

Suppose you suspect misconduct. What actually happens next? Research institutions are legally and ethically obligated to have formal procedures. Procedures for receiving, investigating, and adjudicating allegations of research misconduct. It begins with an allegation. A formal or informal report, made to the integrity office or a senior official. Then an inquiry. An initial fact-finding process. Its only question is whether the allegation has substance enough to warrant investigation. Then the investigation itself, run by an independent committee. A formal, systematic examination of records and data, including interviews. Then adjudication. The institution makes a finding, and determines sanctions if misconduct is confirmed. The respondent typically has the right to appeal the finding, or the sanctions. Findings may then reach funding agencies, journals, and where federal funds are involved, the ORI.

Speaking Up

Protections for Whistle-Blowers

None of that machinery works if nobody is willing to start it. Individuals who report suspected misconduct in good faith are entitled to protection. Protection from retaliation, specifically. Institutions are legally obligated to protect complainants from adverse actions. Dismissal, demotion, or harassment as a consequence of their report. Think about who is usually placed to notice misconduct first. Often it is someone junior to the person responsible for it. Which means the person best placed to report has the most to lose. That is why these protections are structural, and legally backed. They are essential for maintaining a culture in which misconduct can be reported without fear.

Mandatory Reporting

Child Abuse and Neglect

Now the legal obligations, which sit alongside the ethical ones. In most jurisdictions, psychologists and researchers are mandatory reporters. They are legally required to report reasonable suspicions of child abuse or neglect, to the appropriate child protection authority. Here is the part that surprises students. That obligation applies regardless of the research context. It overrides confidentiality obligations. There is no research exemption. Which creates a second duty, arriving much earlier in the project. Researchers must inform participants of this limit to confidentiality. During the informed consent process, before anything has been disclosed.

Duty To Warn

The Tarasoff Obligation

The second legal duty comes from a landmark court case. Tarasoff versus Regents of the University of California, in nineteen seventy six. Flowing from that case, psychologists in many jurisdictions have a duty to warn. A duty to warn identifiable third parties. Third parties who are at serious and imminent risk of harm. Harm from a research participant, or from a client. Notice the two qualifiers. Identifiable, and imminent. A vague sense of unease does not trigger the duty. The exact requirements vary by jurisdiction, and that variation matters. Researchers must be familiar with the laws applicable in their own location.

Privacy And Funding

HIPAA, GDPR, and the Common Rule

Research involving personal data is subject to privacy legislation. Which law applies is a question about whose data you are holding. In the United States, HIPAA governs health-related data. That is the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. In the European Union, the General Data Protection Regulation applies. GDPR covers any research involving citizens of the EU. Researchers must understand which regulations apply to their own work. And then implement data management practices that comply with them. There is one more layer, for research with federal funding. The Common Rule, cited as forty five C F R forty six. It sets minimum standards for review, informed consent, and participant protections. Compliance is a condition of the funding agreement, not an optional extra.

Putting It Together

Six Commitments, and a Closing Thought

Turn all of that into six things you actually do. Learn the mandatory reporting requirements in your jurisdiction, before fieldwork begins. State the limits of confidentiality, mandatory reporting included, in the consent document. Understand which privacy laws apply, and manage data in compliance with them. Comply with your review board, and with the Common Rule if federal funding is involved. Report suspected misconduct through your institution's formal procedures. And document every decision and action carefully, and promptly. Documentation is what turns a defensible judgment into a demonstrable one. Fabrication, falsification and plagiarism remain the most serious breach of scientific integrity. Understanding both landscapes, ethical and legal, is what lets you protect participants. It is also what lets you respond well when something has gone wrong.

About Research Methods in Psychology at UPI Study

Research Methods in Psychology (Psychology 111) is a self-paced online course of 94 video lessons in 16 chapters, from the scientific method and research ethics to designs, data collection, sampling, measurement, validity, experiments, descriptive statistics and hypothesis testing. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.

Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Psychology and social science courses Every course with PRO →

Compare: Research Methods vs Statistics

Why take it here

Why students take Research Methods in Psychology with UPI Study

How psychologists know what they knowResearch Methods in Psychology teaches how psychological studies are designed, run and judged: research ethics, surveys and observation, correlational and experimental designs, sampling, reliability and validity, and the statistics used to test hypotheses. It is a core course in psychology and many social-science degrees.
Credit at a fraction of the priceThe same 3 credits can cost $750 or more at a US college. Here it is one payment, self-paced, with lifetime access.
Finish your degree soonerTransfer credits reduce the courses you still owe, so you can graduate earlier or lighten a heavy semester.
Strengthen an applicationA completed college-level course on an official transcript shows admissions and scholarship committees you can do the work.
Study on your own scheduleNo start dates, no deadlines. Watch the lessons, practice, and take the final when you are ready.
130,000+students helped with college creditsACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Where the credit goes

Universities that work with NCCRS

Research Methods in Psychology carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.

Thomas Edison State UniversityThomas Edison State UniversitySigned partnerUniversity of the PeopleUniversity of the PeopleSigned partnerCharter Oak State CollegeCharter Oak State CollegeSigned partnerStrayer UniversityStrayer UniversitySigned partnerColumbia Southern UniversityColumbia Southern UniversitySigned partnerIndiana TechIndiana TechSigned partnerPenn StatePenn StateWorks with NCCRSSouthern New Hampshire UniversitySouthern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRSSUNYSUNYWorks with NCCRS +many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →

Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.

FAQ

Questions students ask us

About Handling Misconduct and Meeting Legal Obligations

What counts as research misconduct?
The US Office of Research Integrity defines research misconduct as fabrication, falsification or plagiarism, often shortened to FFP, in proposing, performing or reviewing research or in reporting results. Fabrication is making up data, such as responses from interviews that never happened. Falsification is manipulating materials, equipment, processes or data, such as removing outliers selectively to reach significance. Plagiarism is using another person's ideas, results or words without credit.
What is the difference between research misconduct and honest error?
The difference is intent. An honest error comes from faulty reasoning, bias or poor data collection without any intent to deceive, while research misconduct is an intentional departure from accepted practice. The classification decides the response: honest errors call for correction, while misconduct calls for a formal investigation and possibly sanctions. Treating one as the other either lets misconduct continue or punishes a mistake far too harshly.
What happens after research misconduct is reported?
A report usually moves through four stages: the allegation, an inquiry to decide whether it has enough substance, a formal investigation by an independent committee that examines records and interviews people, and adjudication, where the institution makes a finding and sets any sanctions. The accused researcher can typically appeal. People who report in good faith are legally protected from retaliation such as dismissal, demotion or harassment.
What is the duty to warn in psychology?
The duty to warn is a legal obligation, in many jurisdictions, to warn identifiable third parties who face a serious and imminent risk of harm from a client or research participant. It stems from the 1976 California case Tarasoff v. Regents of the University of California. A vague sense of unease does not trigger it, and the exact requirements vary by jurisdiction, so researchers need to know their local law.

About the Research Methods in Psychology course

How many college credits is Research Methods in Psychology?
Research Methods in Psychology (Psychology 111) carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
How much does Research Methods in Psychology cost and what is included?
$250, paid once, with lifetime access: all 94 video lessons, a practice quiz after each, the graded work and final exam, and an official transcript when you finish. Students who want several courses choose UPI Study PRO instead.
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
UPI Study has signed partner agreements with universities such as Thomas Edison State University, University of the People and Charter Oak State College, and works with universities such as Penn State, SNHU and SUNY. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities. Use "Find my college" on this page to check yours.
How long does Research Methods in Psychology take?
It is self-paced with no deadlines. The 94 lessons total about 16 hours of video; most students add reading and practice time and finish in a few weeks to a few months, on their own schedule.
How are the exams done?
Quizzes and assignments are online in the course. The final exam is taken online with proctoring; a person on the UPI Study team checks assignments, usually within two days.
How do my credits reach my college?
When the course shows 100% complete, request the official transcript from your dashboard. It is sent to the college you name, and you can send it to more than one. Check your college first with "Find my college" on this page, or ask Athena.

Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Research Methods in Psychology.

94 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.

Enroll in Research Methods in Psychology →Download the syllabusEvery course with PRO →
Research Methods in Psychology
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →