Skip to main content

Whistleblowing

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Getting to Good

Abstract

Whistleblowers (also called complainants) are persons with access to information about wrongdoing. As such they are indispensable to self-regulation in science. While allegations can be filed in any regulatory area (research misconduct, human or animal subjects protection, conflict of interest), most attention has been paid to their role in identifying research misconduct (FFP) since other methods of detection such as routine nonfinancial audits, are not required. Federal regulations and many state laws require institutions to: publish policies about how to receive whistleblower/complainant allegations, investigate them including determining whether they are made in good faith and to protect the complainant.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 34.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Bonito A, Titus S, Greene A, Amoozegar J, Eicheldinger C, Wright D. Preparing whistleblowers for reporting research misconduct. Account Res. 2012;19:308–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Culiberg B, Mihelic K. The evolution of whistleblowing studies: a critical review and research agenda. J Bus Ethics. 2016; on-line 20 June.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cyranoski D. Whistle-blower breaks his silence. Nature. 2014;505:593–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gewin V. Uncovering misconduct. Nature. 2012;485:137–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Redman B. Commentary: legacy of the commission on research integrity. Sci Eng Ethics. 2016; on-line January 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Report of the Commission on Research Integrity: Integrity and Misconduct in Research. 1995. US Department of Health and Human Services.

    Google Scholar 

Additional Suggested Reading

  • Gewin V. Uncovering misconduct. Nature. 2012;485:137–139. (Statisticians from another university had to persist for some time to gain attention to findings that did not match an investigator’s data.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Yong E, Ledford H, Van Noorden R. 3 ways to blow the whistle. Nature. 2013;503:454–457. (Some whistleblowers obtain evidence by statistical analysis, others by prolonged efforts to persuade authorities and others by anonymous allegations.)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Caplan, A.L., Redman, B.K. (2018). Whistleblowing. In: Caplan, A., Redman, B. (eds) Getting to Good. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51358-4_10

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51358-4_10

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-51357-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-51358-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics