Welcome to the Rigorous Reproducible Responsible Research Integrity at UF (R4I@UF) website! Please visit each month for a new case that may be used as a framework for a brief conversation about best research practices in your lab meeting, research conference, journal club, or any research meeting.
February 2025 Case of the Month:
An Uncomfortable Working Relationship
Role Play Tips
This month we have a role play related to collaboration and research misconduct. We provide detailed role descriptions and prompts for the role play, but not a script.
- Get to know your character and get creative!
- Play with the prompts! Change them, e.g., by having the character offer a conciliatory opening line or a belligerent opening line.
- Run a role play more than once, changing role players.
Role Play Character Description: The Honest Principal Investigator
You are a successful mid-career scientist who has recently been promoted to full Professor. Although you are used to working alone, you are starting to realize that it is beneficial to collaborate once in a while with others. An up-and-coming but somewhat brash Associate Professor (“Dishonest Principal Investigator”) suggests that you write a grant proposal together and plan to work as co-PIs if funded. At first, you are surprised at this invitation because of some past history with this colleague. Years before, when you both were Assistant Professors, s/he had been accused of making up data, but no formal investigation occurred. You had openly voiced your disapproval of his/her data management practices. Shortly afterward, you took a new position in a different department and let bygones be bygones.
In the end, you set aside your initial misgivings since the research idea s/he is proposing is too good to pass up. You accept his/her invitation and develop a research proposal together that gets funded. As you begin collaborating, your junior colleague finds many ways to let you know that s/he is in charge. You notice that s/he is often critical of you, but you try very hard to get along without letting him/her dominate you.
Soon, methodological disputes arise. First, s/he proposes that you change the research procedure in ways that will favor one of your main hypotheses. You try very tactfully to explain to him/her that biased sampling is not appropriate. You ignore his/her requests even though s/he puts you down for being a goodie-two-shoes.
Then, as you are gathering your preliminary data, s/he instructs you to delete certain cases. Suddenly, you’ve had enough. You tell him/her point blank that what s/he is suggesting that you do is dishonest—in fact, you say the only plausible reason for his/her request is that those cases do not support your hypothesis. You tell him/her in no uncertain terms that there is no way you’ll delete those cases.
S/he threatens dire consequences if you cross him/her on this.
Role Play Character Description: Colleague (Trusted other)
You are a senior professor and a long-term friend and confidant of the Honest Principal Investigator. While you have never experienced exactly this kind of thing, you find it quite believable that the other person would behave in this fashion.
The following are the kinds of questions an insightful colleague might consider asking:
- Are you worrying too much? What could your Co-Principal Investigator do to you if you refused to falsify the data?
- Why do you think s/he is trying to force you to commit the scientific misconduct rather than committing it him/herself?
- Do you think this situation calls for tact? Or something more forceful?
- Do you want to go to ombudsperson or department chair? What are pros and cons?
- This person sounds like trouble. Are you sure you want to continue this collaboration?
Role Play Scenario
The Honest Principal Investigator storms out of the lab, slamming the door, and goes to his/her own office, locks the door and phones a trusted colleague who knows the Dishonest Principal Investigator and is generally aware of their research practices.
The Honest Principal Investigator phones the Trusted Colleague and briefly describes what has transpired and begins to seek counsel.
Prompt
Honest Principal Investigator: “I am so glad I was able to reach you. I’ve got to figure out how to stop (Dishonest Principal Investigator) in his/her tracks! I just don’t want to stop this research project or engage in any fabrication and falsification. What should I do?”
Trusted Colleague: How do you respond?
This case study is from the Office of Research Integrity “RCR Casebook: Stories about Researchers Worth Discussing“. Please see the Resources link above for more information about Collaborative Research and Avoiding Research Misconduct.
This website is a service of UF Research Integrity, Security & Compliance and the “RCR on Campus” working group. We believe that research integrity is not achieved by simply taking an RCR course and “checking the box” that training is done. Our vision is to maintain a research culture in our everyday lives as UF researchers and research trainees in which we naturally follow best practices to ensure that the research we do is responsible, rigorous, and reproducible.
To submit a “Case of the Month” for the R4I@UF website, please contact Wayne T. McCormack, PhD (mccormac at ufl.edu).