Judging the medics' scienceFellowship
In July 2011, the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, in its report ‘Peer-review in Scientific publications’, declared that research integrity is ‘unsatisfactory’ in the UK. Yet to date academic research has not systematically mapped how the concept of integrity in scientific research has evolved, and scholars have not rigorously studied the development of the regulatory mechanisms to prevent and respond to instanced of science misconduct in the UK. Given that scientific work is under growing scrutiny, there is a crying need for such research to be undertaken. This AHRC Fellowship aims to fill part of that gap, by focusing on how the regulation of UK medical doctors, via the jurisdiction of the General Medical Council, has understood the idea of trust, integrity, professionalism and misconduct in science. The project will thus explore the cultural context of scientific misconduct, including the recent breakdown of trust in the medical profession, and public expectations of transparency in science. The Fellowship is part of a larger interdisciplinary programme, which combines textual analysis and ethnographic practice, in order to map legal and regulatory mechanisms that prevent and respond to misconduct in science. This larger programme will eventually form the basis of Trials of Research, a book manuscript on the legal cultures of research integrity.