ASA has several policies that lay out expectations for ethical conduct of members with respect to ASA activities, roles, and honors. These include a meetings code of conduct, ethics disclosure policies, an awards revocation policy, and a policy on removal from leadership positions
Ethics Disclosure Policies
Disclosures for Awards
All nominations for awards will include response to a question regarding the nominee’s professional ethics and scientific integrity. Finalists for awards will be required to answer a self-disclosure question regarding professional ethics and scientific integrity.
If ASA-wide awards are given to a group/ program/ institution or other non-individual entity, a head of the group will be asked to answer the ethics disclosure question prior to the public announcement of the award and that person will be the required ASA member.
The question for nominations follows: “All ASA members and nominees are expected to meet the commonly held standards of professional ethics and scientific integrity articulated in our Code of Ethics (e.g., harassment, plagiarism, discrimination). Do you have any concerns of which ASA should be aware regarding the nominee satisfying this expectation?”
The question for self-disclosures follows: “You have been nominated for Award X. Do you have any concerns of which ASA should be aware regarding how you’ve upheld the standards of professional ethics and scientific integrity as articulated in our Code of Ethics (e.g., harassment, plagiarism, discrimination)?” This question will be asked of the top-ranked candidate for an award.
If a disclosure is made by a nominator or a nominee or other relevant information is brought forward to ASA, it will be evaluated by the executive committee. Once a disclosure/information is received, the executive committee may engage in limited additional fact-finding if deemed necessary, with an understanding that confidentiality should be maintained to the extent practicable. The executive committee will give reasonable consideration to factors like prevalence, duration, time, seriousness of the charges, etc.
A nominee will not be given an award if the executive committee finds there is credible evidence of a nominee not meeting or upholding the standards articulated in the ASA Code of Ethics (e.g., harassment, plagiarism, discrimination).
If the executive committee determines during the nomination phase that a disclosure or other information should preclude someone from receiving an award, that nomination will not be forwarded to the relevant award committee for consideration, though the committee will be informed that a nomination was withheld. Given the tight timeline, it may be the case that an award committee needs to deliberate while the executive committee is considering a disclosure or other information. Should the executive committee determine that a nomination should be withdrawn from consideration, the relevant award committee will be notified promptly. Should the executive committee receive a disclosure or information that it determines should preclude someone from receiving an award after a preliminary award decision has been made by the relevant award committee, the executive committee will inform the award committee that it has to revisit the decision. It will be at the discretion of the executive committee to determine how much information should be shared. If the executive committee considers a disclosure or information prior to the announcement of an award and determines that it should not preclude the person in question from the possibility of receiving an award, the relevant award committee will be informed of that decision.
Disclosures for Leadership Positions
Before being brought forward for election or appointment, all nominees for Council, standing committees, and editorships will be required to answer a self-disclosure question regarding professional ethics and scientific integrity.
The question for self-disclosures follows: “You have been nominated for position X. Do you have any concerns of which ASA should be aware regarding how you’ve upheld the standards of professional ethics and scientific integrity as articulated in our Code of Ethics (e.g., harassment, plagiarism, discrimination)?” If a disclosure is made or other relevant information is brought forward to ASA, it will be evaluated by the executive committee. Once a disclosure/information is received, the executive committee may engage in limited additional fact-finding if deemed necessary, with an understanding that confidentiality should be maintained to the extent practicable. The executive committee will give reasonable consideration to factors like prevalence, duration, time, seriousness of the charges, etc. A nominee will not be considered for a leadership position if the executive committee finds there is credible evidence of a nominee not meeting or upholding the standards articulated in the ASA Code of Ethics (e.g., harassment, plagiarism, discrimination). In addition, the Executive Committee has the authority to discuss issues that are raised related to fiduciary-level concerns, with the possibility of determining that a nominee should not be considered for a leadership position.
Awards Revocation Policy
ASA may revoke an award when an awardee has not met or upheld the standards or principles articulated in the ASA Code of Ethics. An award may be revoked in accordance with the Committee on Professional Ethics policies and procedures. If a request for award revocation is made under circumstances that are ineligible for COPE consideration (and only for awards given after this policy was approved [in 2020]), the ASA Council may act independently of the COPE policies and procedures.
The ASA Council may revoke an award based on the following procedures:
If a member believes that an award should be revoked because the awardee has not met or upheld the standards or principles articulated in the ASA Code of Ethics, a request for review should be made to the executive director. The executive director will determine whether the case falls under COPE jurisdiction. If so, the COPE policies and procedures will be followed. If the request for award revocation is made under circumstances that are ineligible for COPE consideration, but the request for revocation alleges that an awardee has not met or upheld the standards or principles articulated in the ASA Code of Ethics, the executive director will facilitate the alternate process for evaluating an award revocation request.
Alternate process: The complainant should submit to the executive director information regarding findings, actions, or sanctions taken by a credible body, including, but not limited to, a Federal government agency or office (i.e., NSF, NIH), a professional organization, an academic institution, or a court of law. The executive committee, along with the chair or a co-chair of the Committee on Professional Ethics, will consider revocation requests. The executive committee may engage in limited additional fact-finding if deemed necessary, with an understanding that confidentiality should be maintained to the extent practicable. The award winner in question must be notified, if he or she is living, that a revocation request has been made and provided with an opportunity to respond to the executive committee.
An award will be considered by Council for revocation if the executive committee finds there is credible evidence of an awardee not meeting or upholding the standards or principles articulated in the ASA Code of Ethics (e.g., harassment, plagiarism, discrimination). Council votes on revocation decisions based on the recommendations of the executive committee. A 2/3 vote of Council is required for an award revocation.
Should a decision be made to revoke an award via either process, the Committee on Awards and the current committee for the award in question will be informed prior to publicizing the decision.
Policy on Removal from Leadership Positions
ASA members may be removed from positions of organizational leadership in accordance with provisions in the ASA Bylaws. If a member believes that a person should be removed from a position of leadership, a request for review should be made to the executive director.
Meetings Code of Conduct
Read the code of conduct on the Annual Meeting Registration page.
