• Some aspects of conduct are too new or poorly defined to allow for a simple answer about what is appropriate. Other behaviors may stem simply from bad manners, honest error, or differences of opinion, which may be questionable without being research misconduct.
• Impressions should be validated before making serious charges, and many apparent problems can be resolved by other means.

Dispute resolutionMany concerns are best addressed by means other than alleging research misconduct. Some institutions have formal mechanisms in place for conflict resolution, mediation, or arbitration; absent such mechanisms, finding a solution to a dispute may require some creativity.

• Conflict resolution: Often, good conflict resolution skills may be helpful or even sufficient. Deal with the problem as early as possible. Begin by defining points of agreement and then work on areas of disagreement. Emphasize the problem rather than the person. Give and ask for clear communication about what is most important to each of the interested parties.
• Mediation: A respected third party can sometimes help with mediating a dispute. The goal is to clarify issues in a way that permits the best possible agreement or compromise.
• Arbitration: When other avenues of communication have failed, then parties to a dispute might be convinced to put their cases before a mutually agreeable arbitrator for review and a binding decision.

Public Allegations

• The pace of the process for dealing with alleged misconduct can be frustrating. In such circumstances, it can be tempting to discuss the case publicly. However, placing a complex, unresolved issue into the public arena can be harmful to those directly involved and the scientific community as a whole.
• Publicity may also compromise the integrity of an ongoing inquiry and the privacy of parties to the investigation. Moreover, an attempt to circumvent the institutional process may prejudice those charged with reviewing the allegation.