Research Secrecy Revealed

If biomedical research was truly a cooperative enterprise geared around the improvement of public health, individual researchers would openly and unselfishly share their methods and findings among each other: together we march in the pursuit of knowledge and the betterment of humankind. Aren’t the concepts of ‘information sharing’, ‘open access’ and ‘technology transfer’ all the rage? But that’s not really how it goes, or how it ever went, of course. As most of those working in highly competitive research institutions will acknowledge – but probably not in earshot of their colleagues – the phenomenon of withholding knowledge from fellow members of the scientific community is a pretty frequent occurrence. When money (or tenure, or ego) talks, researchers may clam up at the expense of the common good.

A pair of studies published in the February 2006 issue of Academic Medicine indicates some of the features and the extent of the phenomenon in the United States. The study by Blumenthal et. al. surveyed withholding behaviors on the part of 2893 life scientists at the 100 universities enjoying the most NIH funding in 1998. Respondents were asked if they had avoided disclosure of unpublished scientific information in causal conversations with colleagues, seminars or conferences. They were also asked they had withheld information from research manuscripts in order to protect their scientific edge or the commercial value of the data, including delaying publication of results for more than six months. A good 44% of geneticists reported having withheld scientific information in one form or another. Not surprisingly, those who reported withholding were more likely to have relationships with industry beyond funding of their research, i.e. acting as consultants or owning equity.

Perhaps more depressing is the potential impact of withholding information on education and mentoring of future scientists. Vogeli et. al. have conducted a national survey of 1000 graduate students and postdoctoral fellows in the life sciences, chemical engineering and computer sciences at 50 US universities, and found that 25% of respondents experienced denials for requests for data, information, materials or programming. About half the respondents reported that withholding had a negative effect on their own research or the progress of their lab or group. A third reported negative effects on their education, and a quarter reported negative effects on communication within their research group. Some of those denied data reported having to abandon a line of research, being unable to confirm the results of other scientists, or having their research or a publication delayed.

Neither study attempts to distinguish between forms of ‘withholding behavior’ that may be ethically justified and those that are cause for alarm. But both suggest that the marriage between university research and industry may have serious distorting effects on both scientific progress and education.
- Stuart Rennie