Problems of scientific misconduct, from blatant fraud to questionable research practices, have gained public attention in the wake of several scientific scandals. A common response is to ask for more administrative regulation and control. However, Merton´s classic analysis of academia as an autonomous social institution emphasized the role of its ethos, which he condensed in the four CUDOS-ideals: Commun(al)ism, Universalism, Disinterestedness and Organized Skepticism. These norms Merton related to a perceived absence of fraud in his time. Later researchers, however, have suggested that scientific subcultures may subscribe to norms contrary to the CUDOS-principles, which might have an important effect on attitudes to scientific integrity.

Several studies show that organization-related factors, such as competitive pressures, reinforce extrinsic motivation but undermine intrinsic motivation and increase the risks of cheating. In a first step, we use these results to build a model which considers how factors in the organizational climate are related to norm subscription, and how these factors and norms directly and indirectly impact on research ethics. A survey to organization researchers received 200 responses which indicated a good fit between our survey items and the model variables.  In a second, planned step, we will explore how academic institutions may build ethics infrastructure to support scientific norm building and facilitate the exposure of unethical behavior.