ic-commercial collaboration, especially in the area of clinical research. Many universities are adopting new and more stringent rules to govern conflict of interest and ownership of intellectual property, including categories of activities with differing requirements for disclosure as well as prohibited activities and relationships. An instructive case is the debate accompanying the adoption in 1990 of conflict-of-interest rules at the Harvard University Medical School (Harvard University Faculty of Medicine, 1990).
Conflicts of interest have the potential to affect peer review, publication and data management practices, training and mentorship, and other practices and behavior. For this reason, some scientific journals require authors to disclose sources of support and potential sources of bias when submitting their research papers.5 Such conflicts also can influence the investigation of allegations of misconduct in science, especially if biases are not detected in the formation of investigatory panels that review and adjudicate misconduct complaints.
Although the panel does not believe that industry-university research arrangements present unique risks for misconduct in science, the self-serving interests associated with such arrangements pose issues that require institutional attention and oversight to ensure the integrity of the research process.
The contemporary research enterprise is far removed from that of the pre-World War II era. In particular, the academic research community, governed by traditions derived from an earlier model of a community of independent scholars who participated equally in academic governance, is challenged by the complexity of today's issues and of the environment in which research is conducted. Still, basic research continues to flourish, and faculty, postdoctoral fellows, and graduate students continue to contribute extraordinary research capability to science.
Concerns are apparent, however, and it is clear that key environmental factors require attention to protect the high standards of research integrity traditionally associated with scientists and their institutions. In reviewing changes within the scientific research enterprise, the panel reached the following conclusions:
Scientific research is part of a larger and more complicated enterprise today, creating a greater need for individual and institutional attention to matters that affect the integrity of the research process. Scientists themselves and research institutions will be ex-