A pilot study of universities' willingness to solicit whistleblowers for participation in a study. Issue 4 (1st October 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Byrn, Melissa J.; Redman, Barbara K.; Merz, Jon F.
• Is Part Of: AJOB empirical bioethics. Volume 7:Issue 4(2016)
• Page Start: 260
• Page End: 264
• Publication Date: 2016-10-01
• Subjects: Research misconduct -- whistleblower -- research ethics -- human subjects research -- animal research -- academic research; Bioethics -- Periodicals; Bioethics -- Research -- Periodicals; Bioethics -- Methodology -- Periodicals; Medical ethics -- Periodicals; 174.205
• DOI: 10.1080/23294515.2016.1182951
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2329-4515

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Background : It has been more than two decades since the only interview study of whistleblowers in academic research. There remains a need to appreciate whistleblower experience, role in scientific integrity, and whether policies provide adequate protection.Methods : We contacted the institutional official for research, the institutional review board (IRB) director, and the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) director from a random sample of 25 of the highest 200 NIH funded institutions. We assessed the willingness of respondents to send a hypothetical solicitation letter to whistleblowers who had lodged complaints related to research.Results : The response rate was 41%. Despite a willingness to distribute a solicitation letter (68% respondents), most wanted further institutional approval before sending it (76%).Conclusion : Data from this pilot study suggest substantial obstacles to obtaining access to whistleblowers by way of anonymous solicitation letters distributed by institutions.