Data Withholding in Genetics and the Other Life Sciences: Prevalences and Predictors

Purpose To better understand the variety and prevalence of data withholding in genetics and the other life sciences and to explore factors associated with these behaviors. Method In 2000, a sample of 2,893 geneticists and other life scientists (OLS) at the 100 most research-intensive universities in the United States were surveyed concerning data withholding and sharing. The instrument was developed and pretested in 1999. The two primary outcome measures were withholding in verbal exchanges with colleagues about unpublished research (verbal withholding) and withholding as part of the publishing process (publishing withholding). The independent variables related to the personal characteristics, research characteristics of faculty, and previous experience with data withholding. Results A total of 1,849 faculty responded (64%): 1,240 geneticists and 600 OLS. Forty-four percent of geneticists and 32% of OLS reported participating in any one of 13 forms of data withholding in the three previous years. Publishing withholding (geneticists 35%, OLS 25%) was more frequent than verbal withholding (geneticists 23%, OLS 12%). In multivariate analyses, male gender, participation in relationships with industry, mentors' discouraging data sharing, receipt of formal instruction in data sharing, and negative past experience with sharing were significantly associated with either verbal or publishing withholding among either geneticists or OLS. Conclusions Data withholding is common in biomedical science, takes multiple forms, is influenced by a variety of characteristics of investigators and their training, and varies by field of science. Encouraging openness during the formative experiences of young investigators may be critical to increased data sharing, but the effects of formal training do not appear straightforward.

[1]  Arnold Thackray,et al.  Private science : biotechnology and the rise of the molecular sciences , 1998 .

[2]  Walter W. Hauck,et al.  Bioequivalence of generic and brand-name levothyroxine products in the treatment of hypothyroidism. , 1997, JAMA.

[3]  D Blumenthal,et al.  Looking a gift horse in the mouth: corporate gifts supporting life sciences research. , 1998, JAMA.

[4]  D Blumenthal,et al.  Relationships between academic institutions and industry in the life sciences--an industry survey. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  D Blumenthal,et al.  Participation of life-science faculty in research relationships with industry. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  Melissa S. Anderson,et al.  Data Withholding and the Next Generation of Scientists: Results of a National Survey , 2006, Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges.

[7]  Charles E. Heckler,et al.  Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis , 2005, Technometrics.

[8]  E. B. Andersen,et al.  Modern factor analysis , 1961 .

[9]  Melissa S. Anderson,et al.  Withholding research results in academic life science. Evidence from a national survey of faculty. , 1997, JAMA.

[10]  Max F. Rothschild,et al.  Access to data and intellectual property. , 2002 .

[11]  David Blumenthal,et al.  Data withholding in academic medicine: characteristics of faculty denied access to research results and biomaterials , 2000 .

[12]  Jennifer L. Berdahl,et al.  Men, Women, and Leadership Centralization in Groups Over Time. , 2005 .

[13]  S. Hilgartner,et al.  Data withholding in academic genetics: evidence from a national survey. , 2002, JAMA.

[14]  Rachelle D. Hollander,et al.  Normative Issues in Data Sharing , 1991 .

[15]  J Collins,et al.  Looking a Gift Horse in the Mouth. , 1963, The Journal of the College of General Practitioners.

[16]  N. Holtzman What Role for Public Health in Genetics and Vice Versa? , 2006, Public Health Genomics.

[17]  J. Cohen,et al.  Share and share alike isn't always the rule in science. , 1995, Science.