Q: My experience of research misconduct
I experienced research misconduct at an experiment during my doctoral course. The supervisor misidentified an immunostaining marker, and I immediately pointed out that mistake. However he kept ignoring my words and submitted the paper with wrong results to a journal. It was rejected because the consent was not obtained from all co-authors, but just after that he submitted it to another journal and it was accepted. He is very proud and regards himself as a hero because he thought he overturned the established theory. I am concerned about future adverse effects from this wrong results.
We’re extremely sorry to learn about the situation. We hope we’ll be able to assuage your anxiety and distress, at least to some extent.
First, some additional details, such as the name of the journal, the proposed date of publication, and whether you’re listed as the main/corresponding author, would help us guide you further.
Since you have been subjected to academic misconduct, you may raise a concern with the journal regarding the following:
- Submission of the paper without your consent, if you’re listed as a co-author
- Plagiarism or copyright violation, if you’re not listed as a co-author (and have in fact been involved in authoring the paper)
However, the journal will require proof to support your claim. Specifically, the following aspects need confirmation:
- Written communication with your supervisor with your warnings about the error
- The validity of the claim itself (that the immunostaining marker is indeed incorrect)
Hence, you may wish to consider if you will be able to support your assertion with evidence before taking this step.
The possible solutions from the journal include:
- Withdrawal of the paper
- Removal of your name as a co-author*
* This would help avoid the repercussions for your academic career, but it won’t entirely solve the issue, as the results, which I presume are incorrect, will still be in the public domain, running the risk of future studies using this information and arriving at erroneous conclusions.
Secondly, as per “Resolving authorship disputes by mediation and arbitration”, the usual response from the journal is that the authors must settle internal disputes among themselves. Hence, you may wish to try to resolve this cordially within your university:
- Try to discuss the matter and arrive at an amicable solution with your immediate supervisor.
- Failing this, universities generally have established procedures for escalations in the event of issues such as this.
- Depending on the structure of your university, you may wish to approach your academic advisor (if this is a different person from your supervisor), the academic dean or vice president of your department, or the supervisor of your supervisor.
However, this must be done bearing in mind the possible implications for your relationship with your supervisor and how this would affect future collaborations with them.
Litigation would be a final route. You may seek advice from your lawyer regarding this. Sometimes, a legal letter may suffice to resolve the matter. This is as long as you’re absolutely sure about the misidentified immunostaining marker. Should your supervisor require a confirmation from a third party that the immunostaining marker is indeed misidentified, we can assist you with this under our Pre-submission Peer Review service, where we check for methodological soundness and share suggestions in this regard with authors. However, considering or ignoring these suggestions is at the discretion of authors.
We wish you all the very best with resolving this issue. We sincerely hope you’re able to arrive at a solution that is acceptable to you as well as beneficial for the academic community at large.
This content belongs to the Conducting Research Stage