Little is known about the mechanisms by which psychology graduate programs transmit responsible conduct of research (RCR) values. A national sample of 968 current students and recent graduates of mission-diverse doctoral psychology programs, completed a web-based survey on their research ethics challenges, perceptions of RCR mentoring and department climate, their ability to conduct research responsibility, and whether they believed psychology as a discipline promotes scientific integrity. Research experience, mentor RCR instruction and modeling, and department RCR policies predicted student RCR preparedness. Mentor RCR instruction, department RCR policies, and faculty modeling of RCR behaviors predicted confidence in the RCR integrity of the discipline. Implications for training are discussed.

Little is known about the mechanisms by which psychology graduate programs transmit responsible conduct of research (RCR) values. A national sample of 968 current students and recent graduates of mission-diverse doctoral psychology programs, completed a web-based survey on their research ethics challenges, perceptions of RCR mentoring and department climate, their ability to conduct research responsibility, and whether they believed psychology as a discipline promotes scientific integrity. Research experience, mentor RCR instruction and modeling, and department RCR policies predicted student RCR preparedness. Mentor RCR instruction, department RCR policies, and faculty modeling of RCR behaviors predicted confidence in the RCR integrity of the discipline. Implications for training are discussed. KeywordsEthics; Research; Responsible Conduct of Research; Mentoring; Department; Climate; Graduate Education; Psychology Graduate programs are the primary training ground for socializing each new generation of psychologists in the values and ethical practices guiding the responsible conduct of research (RCR). Through departmental policies, mentoring and student involvement in research, graduate education in psychology creates the climate in which research integrity flourishes or flounders (Fisher, Wertz, & Goodman, in press). Psychology has over five decades of history promoting the responsible conduct of research through the American Psychological Association's Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct (APA, 2002, Fisher, 2009Canter, Bennett, Jones & Nagy, 1994;Hobbs, 1948;Sales & Folkman, 2000;Smith, 1976) and ethics scholarship influencing moral debate within the field and throughout the social sciences (e.g., Baumrind, 1964;McGaha & Korn, 1995;Melton, Koocher & Saks, 1983;Milgram, 1963). Although ethics complaints against psychological scientists are infrequent (APA, 2004(APA, -2008, like other disciplines, psychology has not escaped highly publicized cases of scientific misconduct (Needleman, 1993;Salter, 1998;Sprague, 1993). Violations of research ethics regulations and professional standards, whether born of lack of awareness or understanding of RCR requirements or of malicious intent, undermine the overall integrity of the research enterprise (Eisen & Berry, 2002;Steneck, 2001). In recent years, increased public awareness of the effect of basic science and clinical trials on public health policy and health services along with some highly publicized cases involving charges of scientific misconduct (Eisen & Berry, 2002; CRI, 1995; NAS, 2002) RCR training of investigators conducting federally funded research (PHS, 2000(PHS, , 2001 and prompted the Office of Research Integrity to provide guidelines on specific RCR core instructional areas. The current APA Ethics Code (APA, 2002) includes ethical standards corresponding to each of these RCR core areas, including data management, human participant and animal subject protections, publication practices and responsible authorship, peer review, and conflicts of...

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract