Description of mentoring
The role and definition of mentoring is central to any discussion of the responsible conduct of research. Mentors teach responsible conduct explicitly and by example. More generally, mentoring the next generation of scientists is a responsibility for current scientists.

A mentor is someone who has experience with the challenges to be faced by the trainee, the ability to communicate that experience, and the willingness to do so. In Greek mythology, Mentor was a trusted friend of Odysseus and helped to advise Telemachus, the son of Odysseus. Like Telemachus, a research trainee will benefit most from close ties over an extended period of time with a mentor who is personally committed to the relationship. In this context, mentoring involves more than just what is verbalized, a mentor also instructs by being a role model.

Lack of mentoring
One important role for a mentor is to assist the trainee in understanding and adhering to the standards of conduct within his or her profession. Mentoring of new researchers by senior investigators can be an ideal for passing standards from one generation of scientists to the next. Within a small research group, this mentoring should readily occur, but many current research groups are too large or competitive for this to occur. Whether or not this has changed the extent to which new scientists become aware of prevailing standards of conduct, it appears that issues of responsible conduct are discussed infrequently. Eastwood et al. (1996) found that nearly 40% of postdoctoral research fellows responding to a survey at the University of California, San Francisco reported having had no guidance in ethical research from a scientific mentor. Brown and Kalichman (1998) found that 50% of graduate students responding to a survey at the University of California, San Diego reported that the total time spent discussing responsible conduct of research with a major professor (i.e., thesis advisor) had been one hour or less. Similarly, half of the students reported a total of one hour or less spent discussing such topics with other faculty. In a nationwide survey of doctoral students, Swazey and Anderson (1998) found that for nearly every defined dimension of training in ethics, over half of the respondents reported that little or no help was received from any faculty member.

For better or worse, the default method of teaching the traditions and standards of science is by unwitting and serendipitous example. Unfortunately, without discussion of ethical principles and the purposeful assurance that everyone is included, this approach to training is seriously flawed. The principles of decisionmaking are not explicit and are therefore open to interpretation (and misinterpretation) and many important roles of scientists (e.g., peer review or negotiating collaborations) are not observed by the trainee. The available evidence strongly argues against relying on this approach to training. In their survey of 2000 doctoral students, Anderson et al. (1994) found that departmental climate was the strongest predictor for misconduct. Overall, misconduct occurs more often in those departments in which the climate favors competition and discourages collaboration (Anderson et al., 1994). However, research misconduct occurred least often in those cases in which students felt that their advisors, or others, provided useful feedback and evaluation. Those findings are consistent with the view that the risk of research misconduct is less in environments in which mentoring is provided.

Need for mentoring
The importance of mentoring for training in the responsible conduct of research has been recognized in several national reports on the integrity of research. For example, a report from the Institute of Medicine (1989) noted the importance of mentors and specifically recommended that departments and research units should monitor the supervision and training of young scientists to ensure that it is adequate. In 1992, a Panel on Scientific Responsibility and the Conduct of Research concluded that "Research mentors...are responsible for defining, explaining, exemplifying, and requiring adherence to the value systems of their institutions." Similarly, a more recent report emphasized the importance of continued mentoring for postdoctoral researchers (Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, 2000). In short, although mentoring alone is often insufficient, its importance is widely recognized.

The following four principles provide a basis for defining the roles of mentors and trainees:

1. Effective mentoring is essential for promoting responsible conduct of research
   Responsible conduct is more than the desire to do the right thing or the reading of relevant regulations and publications. It is also important that trainees recognize the wide range of accepted practices, and that some of these practices may be preferable to others. Furthermore, trainees need to understand that to act responsibly depends on an appreciation that standards can vary between and within disciplines, can change over time, and in some cases are not yet clearly defined. For trainees to understand the varied and evolving nature of these standards, it is necessary that experienced scientists clearly convey their understanding of accepted practices in the conduct of research.
2. Seeking effective mentors is a professional responsibility
   Most scientists are in the best position to know their own career aspirations and worries, but few will be fortunate enough to have one or more ideal mentors step in to help. The obvious solution is to seek out more senior scientists, and sometimes peers, who have the experience that is lacking. Finding someone who will be an effective mentor is a responsibility of the trainee.
3. Being a mentor is a professional responsibility
   Just as scientific trainees have a responsibility to seek mentors, scientists have a complementary responsibility to become mentors. Taking an active role in helping to train the next generation of scientists should not be optional-it should be part of the definition of scientist. The research profession is complex and multidimensional. For this reason, the enterprise of science depends on effective communication not just about the science, but about the practice of science, standards of conduct, and ethical and social responsibility. This responsibility for communication extends to all members of the community, not just to senior researchers. For example, it is likely that a newly arrived undergraduate student could benefit from the mentoring of a graduate student, technician, or even a more senior undergraduate.
4. A single mentor is not likely to be sufficient
   Widely ranging needs at different stages of a career are not likely to be met by one mentor only-in part because not all established scientists can bring the requisite time, knowledge, and interest to the full range of issues that are likely to be important to each trainee. For that reason, the term mentor is best used broadly to mean any person who helps another with one or more aspects of his or her personal and/or professional development. In this sense, trainees are encouraged to seek out multiple mentors, each of whom can provide the expertise and experience to fulfill one or more of the trainee's needs.

Regulation of mentoring
Effective mentoring is important to promote the responsible conduct of research, but no regulations explicitly require or prescribe standards for mentoring. The lack of absolute rules is appropriate considering that the success of mentoring depends on the widely varying skills, needs, and attitudes of different individuals.

The few federal requirements most applicable to the topic of mentoring are those that call for instruction in the responsible conduct of research (RCR). The relevant Public Health Service requirements for training in RCR include a "Requirement for instruction in the responsible conduct of research in National Research Service Award institutional training grants" (NIH, 1989, 1992), "Required education in the protection of human research participants" (NIH, 2000), and the currently suspended "PHS policy on instruction in the responsible conduct of research" (PHS, 2000; ORI, 2001) for all researchers. Although not explicitly required by any of these documents, mentors can and should have a primarily role in delivering instruction in the responsible conduct of research.

Guidelines for mentoring
Many resources are now available to guide both mentors and trainees in optimizing mentoring. Several examples are included in the section on "References for Further Reading." Some of the key points are summarized in the following three sections: (a) Topics for mentoring; (b) Responsibilities of trainees; and (c) Responsibilities of mentors.

Topics for mentoring
To appreciate potential contributions of mentors, it is helpful to consider the wide range of needs to be met. First, and foremost, mentors in the biomedical sciences should help trainees to develop as capable researchers. A mentor can contribute to the technical development of the trainee in many aspects of research including methods for doing research, research directions, creative thinking, completing academic or professional requirements, and scientific communication.

A second essential need for trainees is career development and preparation for the job market. This includes an understanding of the current job market, opportunities to make contacts with leaders in the trainee's field of research, active introduction into the network of people working in his or her discipline, and an awareness of the range of career options.

Another focus of mentoring is socialization of trainees. Such socialization would include ethical development as well as an understanding of the political, economic, and social elements of interacting within the academic community, and instilling a sense of collegiality. This training includes promotion of skills for teaching, communication, working in teams, leadership, management of people, interacting with others, listening, expressing ideas, administration and planning, and budget management.

Often trainees will have special circumstances to be addressed through mentoring-for example, problems of gender, race, national origin, language, or a speech impediment.

Clearly, the above list is long, but all of these elements, and more, are components necessary to survive and succeed in academia. A complete list of such elements should be limited only by the needs of the individual trainee. Any situation in which one person's knowledge or skill is greater than another's is a potential starting point for a mentoring relationship.

1. Identify career plans
   The first step in seeking a mentor is for a trainee to identify particular needs. What are his or her career plans? Trainees should assess their skills, talents and interests, and seek advice from someone who is knowledgeable about suitable career options. Someone who can help with this initial look at career plans may be, or may become, a mentor, but this is not essential.
2. Locate prospective mentors
   Having identified general career interests, a trainee should seek as prospective mentors people who have succeeded in making the transition from where the trainee is now to where the trainee hopes to be. This means identifying people who know and have overcome the challenges to success. For example, for some women it would be invaluable to seek out women who have met the challenges they are likely to face.
   
   Characteristics to look for in potential mentors include experience in areas relevant to the trainee's personal and career development, an interest in the trainee and his or her career, a willingness to make the time to meet with the trainee, and an ability to provide the trainee with useful advice-not a rigid set of demands. In addition, an ideal mentoring relationship depends on compatibility in the personalities of the mentor and trainee. Assessing such qualities and interpersonal skills is much more difficult than gauging someone's success as a researcher. However, because research is defined by personal as well as professional relationships, these qualities are as important as any other criteria in identifying a supervisor, thesis advisor, or mentor.

Finding a compatible mentor, advisor, or supervisor works best when trainees first do their homework. What do previous trainees or employees report of their experience working with the prospective mentor? What is the quality of the trainee's interactions with the prospective mentor?

3. Distinguish between supervisors and mentors
   Not everyone embodies the characteristics needed in a good mentor. While the terms mentor, thesis advisor, and/or research supervisor are frequently used interchangeably, it is important to note that thesis advisors and research supervisors are not necessarily mentors. For example, thesis advisors are responsible for ensuring that students fulfill departmental and institutional requirements for the graduate degree and for providing advice about research directions, methods, and publication. Mentors, on the other hand, provide information beyond scientific concepts and laboratory techniques-information that is essential for professional success, such as how to obtain funding, manage a research lab or group, use time effectively, and understand departmental politics and institutional committees.

Although supervisors ideally are mentors, that is not always the case. In some cases, a thesis advisor or head of a research group will provide much of the mentoring that trainees need. If not, then initiating a discussion with a supervisor about authorship criteria, the funding process, or mentoring itself, might stimulate the supervisor to become a better mentor. However, whether or not a supervisor is an effective mentor, it is unlikely that one person alone can provide all that is needed.

4. Be clear about needs and expectations
   A mentoring relationship should not be a passive one for either the mentor or the trainee. From the trainee's perspective, it is necessary to take an active role in identifying and communicating his or her needs and expectations in the mentoring relationship. At the same time, the mentor's advice should not be accepted without question. Although a mentor can provide a unique and invaluable perspective, the trainee has the responsibility to evaluate the mentor's advice in light of his or her own values, goals, and experience.
5. Keep learning about effective mentoring
   It is important for trainees to continue learning about the mentoring process to optimize their own experience, but also to prepare themselves to be effective mentors. A good starting point would be the resources and mentoring guides listed with this unit.

1. Be available
   Although mentoring and the seeking of mentors can both be viewed as responsibilities, that view will not be shared equally by everyone. This is important to keep in mind whether one is on the giving or receiving end of a mentoring relationship. Although some scientists are motivated to develop the skills and knowledge necessary to be effective mentors, not all trainees reciprocate the commitment to the relationship. Conversely, a trainee can and should strive to find and learn from mentors, but not all mentors will fully reciprocate the trainee's commitment. Thus, an added responsibility for both mentors and trainees is to encourage one another to participate fully, but to respect differences in their commitment to the mentoring relationship.
2. Allow for differences in personalities
   Successful mentoring, as with any close personal relationship, depends greatly on the personalities of the parties involved. Some trainees learn readily with a minimum of nurturing or guidance, or at least prefer to believe that they require a minimum of help. In such cases, frequent and probing discussion with a mentor may be perceived as invasive and micromanagerial. Other trainees may require the reassurance of being closely monitored and receiving frequent feedback, both positive and negative. Conversely, some mentors will be uncomfortable with offering advice or initiating discussions unless first asked by a trainee; while other mentors will readily volunteer information and advice without any clear indication that help would be welcomed. The most effective mentoring is likely to occur when the personalities of the mentor and trainee are a good match. In an effort to act as a mentor, a research supervisor or thesis advisor should attempt to fit his or her style of interaction to best suit the needs and personality of a trainee. Similarly, in an effort to gain the most from a mentoring relationship, the trainee should make allowances for differences in his or her personality from that of the mentor.
3. Let trainees make their own decisions
   The role of the mentor is to provide advice, help, and encouragement. However, the trainee should not be bound to follow suggestions made by the mentor. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the trainee to act based on his or her own values, goals, and experience.
4. Teach by words and example
   Although not all role models are automatically good mentors, modeling of good skills and behavior is a necessary element of mentoring. If a mentor argues for rigorous authorship criteria, but fails to follow his or her own advice, then lessons learned by the trainee may include that the mentor is an unreliable source of information, that the standards of conduct in research are poorly defined, and that the mentor is, unfortunately, a hypocrite. For a mentor, the lesson is that actions speak louder than words. However, it is still important that mentors make explicit the often implicit rationale for their behavior because the policy and philosophy that underlie even the most exemplary behavior may be esoteric to the uninformed observer. This is especially true for observers who have a different cultural background.
5. Keep learning about effective mentoring
   Responsible mentors should strive to continue learning about effective mentoring, both through experience and the available resources about mentoring.