The papers in this issue are based on presentations by the authors at the 163nd National Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Seattle, Washington, 13–18 February 1997 in the session entitled Damned If You Do, Damned If You Don’t: What the Scientific Community Can Do about Whistleblowing organized by Stephanie J. Bird and Diane Hoffman-Kim. The papers have been modified following double blind peer review.

Editors’ Note:As a matter of policy, the editors believe that publishing several reviews of selected texts is a valuable exercise which will enable a cross-section of views to be aired. The recently published second edition of the National Academy of Sciences’ report “On Being a Scientist” was considered an appropriate text for such treatment. The reviewer, Kenneth D. Pimple, Ph.D., is a Research Associate at the Poynter Center for the Study of Ethics and American Institutions and a Visiting Lecturer in (...) the American Studies Program, both at Indiana University. He has been involved with training faculty members to teach ethics since 1989 and is the project director of “Teaching Research Ethics: A Workshop at Indiana University,” with funding from the Department of Education’s Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education. Her interests include nerve development and regeneration. Her research is in the area of analytical chemistry and emphasizes spectroscopic techniques. (shrink)

What comprises ‘data’ varies from one institution to another based on the information which is deemed important by individual institutions. To effectively and efficiently produce, collect, and retain data, an organization develops specific defining characteristics of data to meet its informational needs. Procedures to maintain and retain knowledge among laboratory members and principal investigators will allow for improved efficiency of data collection. Optimization of communication, maintenance of inventories, record keeping, and updating relevant training programs are all critical to supporting the (...) quality and integrity of a particular organization’s data. Concurrent revisions to such procedures will ensure that the definition of data as well as the means by which it is collected and maintained remain appropriate to the needs of the individual organization. (shrink)