A world without trust is a world most people don’t want to live in

Part of what makes life livable is a sense that there are some people whom you can trust pretty much all the time. We all know that there are cheats in the world, as well as confidence tricksters, liars and many other kinds of untrustworthy people. Nevertheless, we have to trust others to make it possible to trade, govern and be governed and know what to believe and how to live our lives. If no one is trustworthy, any kind of civilized life becomes impossible.

That’s what this report by The International Herald Tribune on the incidence of scientific fraud in the United States is so worrying (“Scientific Fraud: There’s more of it than you think”). Most of us believe that one mark of being a ‘professional’ is adherence to a set of ethical standards. Scientists are honor-bound to report their results truthfully, abide by proper standards of research and objectivity, and provide an honest statement of their findings. Since their findings can have a massive impact on many aspects of people’s lives, from health to career direction, we need to trust them. Indeed, in our technology-obsessed world, people and governments seem to place almost an unquestioning reliance on the statements of the people in white lab coats.

Maybe this trust is misplaced:

Almost 9 percent of 2,012 scientists from 605 institutions who were surveyed by the Office of Research Integrity, a monitoring agency for science research, said that they had witnessed some sort of fraud or misconduct in the past three years. ORI estimates that every year, there are three incidences of fraud for every 100 researchers.

Sadly, scientists are no less affected by the pressures to advance themselves by tooting their own horns than the rest of us. They must compete for research grants and tenure-track positions in universities. If they work for commercial organizations, such as pharmaceutical companies, they find themselves facing the same kind of profit-based targets as everyone else. They need to justify their positions and prove their worth on a continual basis.

Probably, much of the low-level fraud goes unnoticed: the ‘forgetting’ of inconvenient data; the quiet playing down of drawbacks and hyping of successes. Some of the highest-profile cases are caught and hit the headlines. Others are fudged and hidden, lest profits or grants be affected and institutions’ reputations lowered.

Just as with the current financial standards, those involved resist external regulation, claiming that they can police themselves, In the same way, we should be skeptical of such claims. Self-regulation demands strong ethics, constant watchfulness and a situation in which maintaining trust will always trump making profits or advancing your career. In today’s world, with its ‘winner-takes-all’ attitudes, the idea seems hopelessly idealistic.

As the IHT article concludes:

The reality is that we are not likely ever to be rid of scientific fraud: The pressures to make a name for oneself and the temptation to cut corners will always exist. Ultimately, science is a human endeavor, and human shortcomings are part of its story. We just have to do a better job in recognizing this — and putting more safeguards in place.

It seems that failing ethical standards, even amongst the most ‘objective’ professionals, is just one more cause for feeling depression nowadays.

Technorati Tags: research fraud, scientific standards, ethics, business ethics, scientific credibility, trust