Like any other country in the world, "academic corruption" occurs from time to time in the United States. The American name of "academic corruption" is "academic misconduct", which means "fabricating, tampering or plagiarizing in the process of proposing, developing and evaluating scientific research projects or reporting scientific research results", and it is necessary to distinguish "misconduct that is knowingly committed from mistakes in normal academic activities". When dealing with academic misconduct, the "integrity office" in the United States basically does not protect its shortcomings and is not soft. Practice has proved that the prevention of academic misconduct cannot rely solely on the self-discipline of the scientific community and scientists themselves. Self-discipline and mutual supervision among peers are important, but they must be backed by perfect legal means. The institution responsible for dealing with academic misconduct in the United States is the Office of Research Integrity under the Department of Public Health Services. Established in 1992, this institution is specialized in accepting and handling reports of academic misconduct, and publishing the names, units, violation plots and disposal decisions of violators at any time. According to American law, any unit that accepts research projects funded by the US federal government has the legal obligation to investigate and deal with academic plagiarism after receiving the report. If it is not handled or condoned, the federal government has the right to stop allocating project funds and no longer accept its project application. The most representative academic misconduct in the United States is the "Schon Incident" in 2002, which is regarded as one of the biggest academic fraud scandals in the scientific community. Hendrick Schon officially joined Bell Laboratories on 1998, and has cooperated with more than 20 other researchers. In just over two years, he has published more than a dozen papers in several world-renowned academic journals, covering frontier fields such as superconductivity, molecular circuits and molecular crystals, some of which are considered to be groundbreaking. Later, some people complained that Schon systematically forged a large number of important experimental results. Bell Laboratories invited five external scientists to form an independent investigation team to investigate the matter. The investigation team finally concluded that Schon fabricated or tampered with the experimental data in at least 16 papers from 1998 to 200 1. In September 2002, Schon was expelled from Bell Laboratories. Even his doctorate was revoked by the University of Constance in June 2004. Usually, if a university receives a report of academic misconduct, it will choose a neutral third party, organize a special investigation Committee, and start the investigation procedure. The whole investigation procedure must be kept confidential to prevent undue pressure from outside, so that investigators can remain neutral and fearless and make fact-finding results. That is, whether the parties plagiarize the facts, whether they are intentional or negligent, whether the nature is serious, whether the influence is bad, whether they are occasional or recidivists. In this process, the school also respects the due process and privacy rights of suspects, gives the suspected plagiarists the opportunity to state, prove and defend themselves, and avoids making accusations of academic plagiarism out of nothing, or colleagues deliberately slander the parties out of academic jealousy. After the investigation, the school allows the final investigation and report to be kept confidential, but the decision must be made public. If the party refuses to accept it, he can bring a lawsuit to the court. Generally speaking, in dealing with academic misconduct, the United States basically never defends its shortcomings, never relents, and treats the parties severely. For the verified plagiarists, the university's penalties include: termination of employment contract, demotion, salary reduction, suspension of postgraduate study, refusal to grant tenured professors, etc. And according to the degree of fault, you may not apply for the project for several years or even for life. Moreover, once academic fraud is exposed, it often means that the parties are ruined and it is difficult to stay in academia. For example, ruggiero, a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, was found to have forged and fabricated psychological findings during her previous work at Harvard University. After confirmation, she was ruled not to apply for research funding for five years. Later, ruggiero, who has been a tenured professor, was forced to resign from his present university. According to federal law, any research project funded by the US federal government will be investigated as long as it is suspected of academic plagiarism and data fraud. But the United States legally distinguishes between academic misconduct and power corruption. Academic misconduct is not power corruption. The former may or may not constitute a crime, but it is a civil issue. The latter is definitely a criminal act and a criminal problem. In recent years, the federal government of the United States has repeatedly urged universities and scientific research institutions to formulate more just and unified policies to deal with academic misconduct, so as to prevent unfair phenomena that vary from unit to unit and safeguard fairness and justice in academic circles.