Chemistry is perhaps the most practical and least glamorous of the natural sciences. While physicists claim to be discovering the fundamental laws of nature and biologists to probe the secrets of life, chemists seem engaged in nothing more exalted than the messy and smelly business of making new substances: dyes and drugs, paints and polymers, fuels and fibers. Chemistry is often characterized as the central science responding to society's needs. Because of that centrality, chemists regularly find themselves with multiple relationships that can lead to conflicts of interest.

A conflict of interest occurs when a professional, in a relationship of trust, has another interest that might interfere with the proper exercise of judgment. Since the day-to-day practice of science is filled with judgments, there are many opportunities for conflicts of interest. Questions of data interpretation, reporting of results, authorship, and peer review all involve professional judgment. For the chemist in a university setting, my primary focus here, these judgments are made in the context of multiple relationships with other parties such as students, postdoctoral research associates, colleagues inside and outside of the department, editors, granting agencies, private industry, and the public. Rarely is the university chemist involved in the relatively simple professional-client relationship that characterizes the practice of medicine or law. Instead, the university chemist must often balance several potentially competing interests. The resulting ethical questions can be perplexing.

Money
The most obvious cases of conflict of interest in chemistry involve money. Because of the utility of chemical research, it is common for a chemical company to retain a university chemist as a consultant. A consulting arrangement might also lead to a contract for basic or applied research to be conducted in the university, often by graduate students or postdoctoral research associates. The contract might include arrangements concerning intellectual property and patent rights. Both personal financial gain and research funding are powerful interests that can interfere with professional judgment. Several possibilities come immediately to mind.

Suppose that a journal asks Professor Aston to review for possible publication a paper written by chemists at a company for whom he serves as a consultant. If the paper concerns research in which Aston is directly involved, he should of course send it back to the journal citing conflict of interest. Suppose, however, that the research is quite distant from his work with the company, but still within his area of scientific competence. Do his financial ties to the company still constitute a conflict of interest? Should he still recuse himself? If he chooses to review the paper, should he disclose his consulting arrangement to the journal's editor?

Here is a more interesting case: Along with her university position, Professor Simpson is involved with a small startup company attempting to commercialize one of her discoveries. Her company is racing to get a product to market and also to publish the scientifically interesting results of its research to strengthen its market position. Simpson knows that other companies are working on similar products. Suppose she is asked to review a paper written by chemists working in one of the competing companies, a paper on a subject having nothing to do with the product that makes that company her company's competitor. Should she agree to review the paper? Can she provide a good professional judgment? Or is there a temptation to judge the paper harshly, delay its publication, and thus make the competing company look less good than it otherwise would?

With the increasing emphasis on technology transfer, university chemists more and more will have to answer such questions.

Reputation
Even when money is not involved, a university chemist can be confronted with competing interests that might compromise good professional judgment. One of the most powerful interests is one's own research reputation. Building a national or international reputation is essential to success in chemistry, as in other fields. With reputation comes tenure and promotion, invitations to speak at important conferences, prizes given by professional organizations, and the increased likelihood of funding. A high profile is also good for one's students and for science because it helps bring in the intellectual and financial resources that facilitate good research and good education.

Overzealous pursuit of personal success, however, can distort professional judgment in a variety of ways.

For example: In chemistry, graduate students become apprentices to faculty, receiving laboratory space, equipment, and financial support in return for conducting much of the laboratory research. Generally, the master's or doctoral project of a student is part of a broader research program conceived by the faculty research advisor. In return for a commitment of time, energy, and ideas to the project, the student is trained in the craft of chemical research. Since some of the credit for successful projects must be given to the student, most publications in chemistry have more than one author: the student is included. The protocol concerning the order of authors is not well established, but a sufficiently significant contribution by a student is often rewarded by putting the student's name first. Often too, or instead, a student's contribution is generously acknowledged in public presentations. The judgment concerning the way in which credit is apportioned rests with the professor, however. Consider the following case:

Martha Scott is a bright student working with Professor Waterman on a project in synthetic organic chemistry. Waterman had suggested a particular target molecule and synthetic strategy to Scott which she tried to implement. After several months of failure, she found an old journal article that gave her a new way to approach the problem. Within days, her new synthetic route had produced the target molecule in high yield. When she presented her results to Waterman, he realized that her results could make his reputation; the target was important and the synthesis was both beautiful and broadly useful. All he would need to do is to avoid playing up Martha's contribution and stress his own and not without justification: The laboratory and project are his; so, his name could justifiably be put first among the authors. He would, of course, take care of Scott when it came time to write recommendations.

Waterman may be right about all this, but clearly his interest in professional success is too powerful for him to be sure he is not planning to treat Scott unfairly. Although the overall design of the project was his, the crucial idea was hers and deserves substantial recognition.

Other Causes of Conflict of Interest
The life of a university chemist is filled with such temptations. Waterman is probably asked by federal agencies like the National Science Foundation to review grant proposals, usually written by researchers working in areas very close to his own. Perhaps by rating their proposals a little lower than they deserve he could increase his own chances of winning scarce resources. He could delay publications of his competitors' results by continually raising objections in the peer-review process. He might be tempted to over-interpret data to make his results look more impressive or to increase the number of his publications. All of these are instances in which an interest in success threatens professional judgment. Students, other scientists, and the process of science, all could be shortchanged.

The moral ideal of science is the habit of truth or, at least, the search for reliable knowledge. The internal code of scientific practice requires, as Richard Feynman said, "a kind of utter honesty-a kind of leaning over backwards," both in dealing with data and its interpretation and in dealing with students, colleagues, funding agencies, and the public. Personal interests, financial or of another sort, can compromise this ideal. A strong personal relationship with a colleague or student can also influence judgment. Finally, as in cases such as cold fusion or polywater, unreasonable commitment to an idea can result in poor science. The chemist stands in the center of many relationships and interests. When a professional judgment is made, the key is to find a path that balances the competing interests in a way withstanding ethical scrutiny.