Ohio Administrative Code › Title 3356 - Youngstown State University › Chapter 3356-10 - Policies on Admission, Retention, and Graduation standards › Section 3356-10-16 - Research misconduct

Current through all regulations passed and filed through July 1, 2024
(A)
								Policy statement.
			 Among the basic principles of Youngstown state university (university) are the
			 pursuit of truth and the responsible exercise of academic freedom. From these
			 principles derive such ideals and values as the freedom and openness of
			 inquiry, academic honesty, and integrity in scholarship and teaching. The
			 university affirms and honors the preservation, growth, and flourishing of
			 these values throughout all its activities, including teaching and learning,
			 research, scholarly inquiry, and creative scholarly endeavor. Accordingly,
			 research misconduct is adverse to the concept of academic freedom and its
			 responsible exercise. It is from this background that the board of trustees
			 implements this policy for handling allegations of misconduct in
			 research.
(B)
								Purpose. To address alleged or apparent misconduct in
			 research and in scholarly and creative activities, irrespective of funding
			 source.
(C)
								Scope. This policy applies to all individuals involved
			 in research and in scholarly and creative activities, including university
			 faculty, staff, scientists, technicians, students, volunteers, visiting
			 researchers or collaborators engaged in research or individuals working under
			 an independent contract for services, and paid by, under the control of, or
			 affiliated with the university at the time of misconduct.
(D)
								Definitions (for
			 purposes of this policy).
(1)
									Definitions used in this policy shall conform to those
			 cited in 42 C.F.R. 93 (public health service policies on research misconduct,
			 department of health and human services) and in 45 C.F.R. 689 (national science
			 foundation, misconduct in science and engineering research):
(a)
										"Allegation" -
			 any written or oral statement or other indication of possible research
			 misconduct to an institutional officer that triggers the procedures described
			 in this policy.
(b)
										"Complainant" - a person who in good faith makes an
			 allegation of research misconduct.
(c)
										"Conflict of
			 interest" - the real or apparent interference of a person's interest with the
			 interests of another, where potential bias may occur due to prior or existing
			 financial, personal or professional relationships.
(d)
										"Deciding
			 official (DO)" - the DO is the institutional official who makes final
			 determinations on allegations of research misconduct and any institutional
			 administrative actions. The DO will not be the same individual as the research
			 integrity officer and should have no direct prior involvement in the
			 institution's allegation, inquiry or investigation assessment. Normally, the
			 provost is the DO at the university. If the provost has a conflict of interest
			 or is otherwise unable to fulfill this role, the president shall appoint the
			 DO.
(e)
										"Fabrication" - making up data or results and recording
			 or reporting them.
(f)
										"Falsification" - manipulating research materials,
			 equipment or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the
			 research is not accurately represented by the research record.
(g)
										"Good faith
			 allegation" - allegations of research misconduct made by a complainant who
			 honestly believes that research misconduct occurred based on the information
			 known at the time.
(h)
										"Inquiry" - preliminary information gathering and
			 fact-finding to determine whether an allegation or apparent instance of
			 misconduct warrants an investigation.
(i)
										"Investigation" -
			 the collection and review of all relevant evidence of the alleged research
			 misconduct, including but not limited to research records, documentation,
			 interviews of those involved and knowledge about the activities under
			 investigation to determine if research misconduct occurred and to recommend
			 appropriate corrective actions.
(j)
										"National science
			 foundation office of inspector general (NSF OIG)" - the office within NSF that
			 oversees investigations of research misconduct and conducts NSF inquiries or
			 investigations into these allegations.
(k)
										"Office of
			 research integrity (ORI)" - the office overseeing and directing public health
			 service research integrity activities on behalf of the secretary of health and
			 human services. This includes oversight of research misconduct inquiries and
			 investigations as well as institutional compliance.
(l)
										"Plagiarism" -
			 the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words
			 without giving appropriate credit.
(m)
										"Preponderance of
			 evidence" - proof by information that compared with that opposing it, leads to
			 the conclusion that the fact at issue is more likely true than
			 not.
(n)
										"Research integrity officer (RIO)" - the institutional
			 official responsible for assessing allegations of research misconduct and
			 determining when such allegations warrant inquiries, overseeing inquiries and
			 investigations; and other responsibilities described in this policy. The DO
			 appoints the RIO. Normally, the director of research services will serve as the
			 RIO of the university.
(o)
										"Research misconduct" - fabrication, falsification,
			 plagiarism in proposing, performing or reviewing research, or in reporting
			 research results.
(p)
										"Research record" - the record of data or results that
			 embody the information resulting from research as well as the record of methods
			 and analysis that led to those data or results, including but not limited to
			 proposal or contract applications, funded or unfunded grants or contracts,
			 progress and other reports, lab notebooks, notes, correspondence, videos,
			 photographs, x-ray files, equipment use logs, biological materials, laboratory
			 procurement records, animal facility records, human and animal subjects
			 protocols, medical charts, patient research files, abstracts, theses, oral
			 presentations, computer files, codes and printouts, manuscripts and
			 publications, musical scores and composition, and choreography.
(q)
										"Respondent" -
			 the person against whom an allegation of research misconduct is made or who is
			 the subject of the research misconduct proceeding.
(r)
										"Retaliation" -
			 an adverse action taken against an individual in response to a good faith
			 allegation of research misconduct or good faith cooperation with research
			 misconduct proceedings of the university.