Ethical Conduct In Science March 2010

ETHICAL CONDUCT IN SCIENCE

STM895 Postgraduate Research Skills In Science, Technology, Maths and Computing

Payam Rezaie PhD

Department of Life Science, Faculty of Science, The Open University, Milton Keynes

Th

e O

pe

n U

niv

ers

ity

LEARNING OUTCOMESLEARNING OUTCOMES

Understand the general principles of ethical conduct in scienceUnderstand the general principles of ethical conduct in science

Understand the basis for the rules of conduct and ethical standards, Understand the basis for the rules of conduct and ethical standards, and how these may conflictand how these may conflict

Justify the necessity for ethical principles and why they should be Justify the necessity for ethical principles and why they should be adhered to in scienceadhered to in science

Outline the responsibilities of the researcher, institution, funding Outline the responsibilities of the researcher, institution, funding agencies and scientific journals in ensuring the integrity of the agencies and scientific journals in ensuring the integrity of the scientific processscientific process

Differentiate between what does and does not constitute scientific Differentiate between what does and does not constitute scientific misconductmisconduct

Consider ethical and legal issues in the use of human and animal Consider ethical and legal issues in the use of human and animal subjects in scientific researchsubjects in scientific research








What is the purpose of (academic) science?What is the purpose of (academic) science?

To advance knowledge and contribute towards the betterment and To advance knowledge and contribute towards the betterment and

welfare of mankind and the world we inhabitwelfare of mankind and the world we inhabit

Knowledge brings with it responsibilityKnowledge brings with it responsibility

GENERAL PRINCIPLESGENERAL PRINCIPLES

When considering thatWhen considering that

Science and technology impact on societyScience and technology impact on society

Affect our day-to-day livesAffect our day-to-day lives

Have the potential for misuse and causing harmHave the potential for misuse and causing harm

It is clear that scientists and scientific practices need to be It is clear that scientists and scientific practices need to be

regulated (monitored) by a system of ‘morals’ and regulated (monitored) by a system of ‘morals’ and

ethical ‘codes of conduct’ethical ‘codes of conduct’

Conduct becoming of scientistsConduct becoming of scientists

Scientists Scientists shouldshould

notnot act in ways that cause needless injury or harm to others act in ways that cause needless injury or harm to others act in ways that promote the welfare of humanityact in ways that promote the welfare of humanity consult on equal, fair-minded, rational and objective consult on equal, fair-minded, rational and objective (unbiased) terms(unbiased) terms uphold the fundamental tenets of integrity in the pursuit of uphold the fundamental tenets of integrity in the pursuit of scientific enquiryscientific enquiry adhere to a system of rules (scientific codes of conduct) adhere to a system of rules (scientific codes of conduct)

set down by organizations, institutions and enforced through set down by organizations, institutions and enforced through legislation legislation

Conduct becoming of scientistsConduct becoming of scientists

ResponsibilityResponsibility

AccountabilityAccountability

Conduct Conduct

(i) academic integrity of the researcher(i) academic integrity of the researcher

(ii) ethical integrity of the scientific activity (method and process)(ii) ethical integrity of the scientific activity (method and process)

experimentationexperimentation

testingtesting

educationeducation

analysisanalysis

storage and dissemination of datastorage and dissemination of data

sources of fundingsources of funding

peer reviewpeer review

etc.etc.








MORAL AND ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES IN SCIENCEMORAL AND ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITIES IN SCIENCE

Progress in science depends on the honest pursuit of scientific research Progress in science depends on the honest pursuit of scientific research and truthful representation of the findings – this is the scientific processand truthful representation of the findings – this is the scientific process

That is, the ability to That is, the ability to obtain knowledge, obtain knowledge, validate and confirm findings through reproducing research methods,validate and confirm findings through reproducing research methods, to evaluate existing knowledge critically,to evaluate existing knowledge critically, and explore new avenues of discoveryand explore new avenues of discovery

Such progress has to be tempered withSuch progress has to be tempered with Honesty Honesty CarefulnessCarefulness OpennessOpenness Intellectual freedomIntellectual freedom Credit and acknowledgementCredit and acknowledgement Public responsibilityPublic responsibility


HonestyHonesty – do not commit fraud (e.g. fabricate, deceive, misrepresent, omit or destroy data)– do not commit fraud (e.g. fabricate, deceive, misrepresent, omit or destroy data)

CarefulnessCarefulness – avoid careless errors in scientific work that may give rise to potentially – avoid careless errors in scientific work that may give rise to potentially disastrous consequencesdisastrous consequences

OpennessOpenness – be willing to share data, methods, theories and so forth once these have been – be willing to share data, methods, theories and so forth once these have been validated, and be open to constructive criticismvalidated, and be open to constructive criticism

Intellectual freedomIntellectual freedom – the freedom to explore new ideas and to criticise old ones, with – the freedom to explore new ideas and to criticise old ones, with implications that the peer-review process and decisions regarding funding for science are fair implications that the peer-review process and decisions regarding funding for science are fair and unbiasedand unbiased

Credit and acknowledgementCredit and acknowledgement – give credit where credit is due, and do not plagiarise the – give credit where credit is due, and do not plagiarise the works of others (with implications for rules governing co-authorship of scientific works and works of others (with implications for rules governing co-authorship of scientific works and appropriate acknowledgements of contributions to said works)appropriate acknowledgements of contributions to said works)

Public responsibilityPublic responsibility – report research in the public media when the work has been – report research in the public media when the work has been validated by scientific peers, and it has important and direct bearing on the advancement of validated by scientific peers, and it has important and direct bearing on the advancement of knowledge and/or on human welfareknowledge and/or on human welfare


Other general ethical principles include rules concerning Other general ethical principles include rules concerning

discriminationdiscrimination

mentorshipmentorship

public policypublic policy

vandalismvandalism

forms of harassmentforms of harassment

These are enforced by both institutions and governmentThese are enforced by both institutions and government








Sound scientific practice and integrity of the researcher Sound scientific practice and integrity of the researcher and the method or process of scientific enquiry fosters and the method or process of scientific enquiry fosters mutual trust and respect among scientists and the mutual trust and respect among scientists and the general public, and maintains confidence in and general public, and maintains confidence in and acceptance of science.acceptance of science.

As individuals, scientists are fallible and mistakes will be As individuals, scientists are fallible and mistakes will be made. Considering the principles of honesty, carefulness made. Considering the principles of honesty, carefulness and openness however, those scientists who and openness however, those scientists who acknowledge their errors and publish retractions should acknowledge their errors and publish retractions should of course, be forgiven.of course, be forgiven.

Society consists of many social institutions (e.g. business and Society consists of many social institutions (e.g. business and industry, religion, law, government, education, medicine, military etc.) industry, religion, law, government, education, medicine, military etc.) with their own rules that guide human conduct.with their own rules that guide human conduct.

Moral dilemmas can arise not only when ethical principles and values Moral dilemmas can arise not only when ethical principles and values conflict, but when the principles upheld by one social institution conflict, but when the principles upheld by one social institution conflict with those of another.conflict with those of another.

The onus on scientists is strictly on their responsibility, accountability The onus on scientists is strictly on their responsibility, accountability and conduct. That is to say, not only should scientists act responsibly and conduct. That is to say, not only should scientists act responsibly in principle, but they will also be held accountable for their conduct. in principle, but they will also be held accountable for their conduct. For this purpose, every organisation and institution (including For this purpose, every organisation and institution (including universities) has a regulatory code that applies to its members. The universities) has a regulatory code that applies to its members. The Open University has an agreed code entitled: “Code of Practice for Open University has an agreed code entitled: “Code of Practice for Research and Those Conducting Research” Research and Those Conducting Research” http://www.open.ac.uk/research/__assets/hqsmswvsfqj1budqwg.pdfhttp://www.open.ac.uk/research/__assets/hqsmswvsfqj1budqwg.pdf

This covers the broader research issues including ethics.This covers the broader research issues including ethics.

INSTITUTIONAL CODES OF CONDUCT - POLICIESINSTITUTIONAL CODES OF CONDUCT - POLICIES








RESPONSIBILITIES OF RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE RESEARCHERTHE RESEARCHER

Maintaining academic integrity (responsibility in the acquisition, Maintaining academic integrity (responsibility in the acquisition, management, analysis, dissemination and ownership of data; and management, analysis, dissemination and ownership of data; and proper disposition of grant incomes, etc.)proper disposition of grant incomes, etc.)

Human values (adherent to stringent moral, ethical and academic Human values (adherent to stringent moral, ethical and academic standards, and behavioural conduct)standards, and behavioural conduct)

Maintaining the dignity of science (through truth, fairness, openness, Maintaining the dignity of science (through truth, fairness, openness, tolerance, honouring of collaborations, and rational enquiry)tolerance, honouring of collaborations, and rational enquiry)

Maintaining rigorous ethical standards in researchMaintaining rigorous ethical standards in research

Working in line with guidelines set by their respective institutions, in Working in line with guidelines set by their respective institutions, in accordance with rules determined by scientific peer-review (and lay-accordance with rules determined by scientific peer-review (and lay-person-review panels where appropriate), within the confines of the person-review panels where appropriate), within the confines of the law.law.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE SUPERVISORTHE SUPERVISOR (MENTOR) (MENTOR)

Setting guidelines and examples of good conduct in laboratory Setting guidelines and examples of good conduct in laboratory work (including keeping laboratory notebooks and sound work (including keeping laboratory notebooks and sound laboratory practices), data analysis etc.laboratory practices), data analysis etc.

Discussing ethical rules and examples, and importantlyDiscussing ethical rules and examples, and importantly

Discussing the justification of these rulesDiscussing the justification of these rules

RESPONSIBILITIES OF RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE INSTITUTIONTHE INSTITUTION

Defining clear guidance and policies on codes of ethical conduct, Defining clear guidance and policies on codes of ethical conduct, and reviewing these when necessaryand reviewing these when necessary

Educating their membersEducating their members

Enforcing their policiesEnforcing their policies

Ethical reviews of proposals to carry out research involving human Ethical reviews of proposals to carry out research involving human or animal subjects should be made outside the governance of or animal subjects should be made outside the governance of science faculties (it is considered a conflict of interest for the science faculties (it is considered a conflict of interest for the faculty to establish the ethical rules under which they will work)faculty to establish the ethical rules under which they will work)

RESPONSIBILITIES OF RESPONSIBILITIES OF FUNDING BODIESFUNDING BODIES

Providing explicit ethical guidelines when calling for submission of Providing explicit ethical guidelines when calling for submission of research proposals, and subsequently screening these to ensure research proposals, and subsequently screening these to ensure that they fulfil their criteria prior to fundingthat they fulfil their criteria prior to funding

(e.g. the proposals having been submitted for and receiving (e.g. the proposals having been submitted for and receiving approval by an appropriate internal ethical review board where approval by an appropriate internal ethical review board where necessary)necessary)

(e.g. that there are no overlapping sources of funding for the same (e.g. that there are no overlapping sources of funding for the same work)work)

(e.g. that there are no conflicts of interest – that is when an author (e.g. that there are no conflicts of interest – that is when an author or an author’s institution has financial or personal relationships or an author’s institution has financial or personal relationships with other individuals or organisations that inappropriately with other individuals or organisations that inappropriately influence or ‘bias’ their actions.)influence or ‘bias’ their actions.)

RESPONSIBILITIES OF PEER-REVIEWED RESPONSIBILITIES OF PEER-REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC JOURNALSSCIENTIFIC JOURNALS

Providing explicit criteria for acceptance of research for publicationProviding explicit criteria for acceptance of research for publication

(e.g. ensuring that authors adhere to codes of conduct regarding (e.g. ensuring that authors adhere to codes of conduct regarding authorship and contribution, experimental conduct, declare any authorship and contribution, experimental conduct, declare any conflicts of interest, sources of funding, and abide by nationally conflicts of interest, sources of funding, and abide by nationally and internationally accepted ethical guidelines such as in the use and internationally accepted ethical guidelines such as in the use of animals or human subjects).of animals or human subjects).

(e.g. ensure that the peer-review process is fair and unbiased, and (e.g. ensure that the peer-review process is fair and unbiased, and the reviewers selected for their qualifications/expertise in the field the reviewers selected for their qualifications/expertise in the field of science under review, and for their impartiality, objectivity and of science under review, and for their impartiality, objectivity and confidentiality)confidentiality)








WHAT CONSTITUTES ETHICAL MISCONDUCTWHAT CONSTITUTES ETHICAL MISCONDUCT

FABRICATIONFABRICATION (making up experimental data)(making up experimental data)FALSIFICATIONFALSIFICATION (altering results or data without statistical justification)(altering results or data without statistical justification)PLAGIARISMPLAGIARISM (appropriating the words or ideas of another and (appropriating the words or ideas of another and presenting these as one’s own)presenting these as one’s own)

Making unfound accusations regarding another researcherMaking unfound accusations regarding another researcherMischievous or malicious misrepresentations of one’s own or another’s workMischievous or malicious misrepresentations of one’s own or another’s workConducting unethical or illegal experiments involving human or animal subjectsConducting unethical or illegal experiments involving human or animal subjects

WHAT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE ETHICAL WHAT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE ETHICAL MISCONDUCTMISCONDUCT

HONEST ERRORHONEST ERROR

TECHNICAL/METHODOLOGICAL DIFFERENCESTECHNICAL/METHODOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES

DIFFERENCES IN THE INTERPRETATION OR JUDGEMENT OF DATADIFFERENCES IN THE INTERPRETATION OR JUDGEMENT OF DATA

SIMPLE AUTHORSHIP DISPUTESSIMPLE AUTHORSHIP DISPUTES








Human and Animal Subjects in Research – Human and Animal Subjects in Research – OU policies and guidelinesOU policies and guidelines

STRATEGY UNIT – RESEARCH ETHICS: HUMAN RESEARCHSTRATEGY UNIT – RESEARCH ETHICS: HUMAN RESEARCHhttp://intranet.open.ac.uk/strategy-unit/offices/ethics/human.shtmlhttp://intranet.open.ac.uk/strategy-unit/offices/ethics/human.shtml

STRATEGY UNIT – RESEARCH ETHICS: ANIMAL RESEARCHSTRATEGY UNIT – RESEARCH ETHICS: ANIMAL RESEARCHhttp://intranet.open.ac.uk/strategy-unit/offices/ethics/animals.shtmlhttp://intranet.open.ac.uk/strategy-unit/offices/ethics/animals.shtml

HUMAN PARTICIPANTS AND MATERIALS ETHICS COMMITTEEHUMAN PARTICIPANTS AND MATERIALS ETHICS COMMITTEEhttp://intranet.open.ac.uk/strategy-unit/committees/hpmec/http://intranet.open.ac.uk/strategy-unit/committees/hpmec/

ANIMAL ETHICS ADVISORY GROUP, OPEN UNIVERSITY ANIMAL USE STATEMENT University Policy on Teaching and ANIMAL ETHICS ADVISORY GROUP, OPEN UNIVERSITY ANIMAL USE STATEMENT University Policy on Teaching and Research Involving AnimalsResearch Involving Animals

http://www.open.ac.uk/science/lifesciences/about-the-department/life-sciences-animal-statement.phphttp://www.open.ac.uk/science/lifesciences/about-the-department/life-sciences-animal-statement.php

Fabrication and Falsification

Importance of Peer Review

Consequences and Accountability

Publishing Research Consortium Peer Review in Scholarly Journals (2008); available at http://www.publishingresearch.net/PeerReview.htm

Fabrication and Falsification

PLAGIARISM

Source: Nature (2005) Volume 435, page 737

http://spore.swmed.edu/dejavu/

CASE STUDIES

• Fabrication in a grant application

• A case of plagiarism

• Publication practices

• Credit where credit is due

• A career in the balance

FABRICATION IN A GRANT APPLICATION

Don is a first-year graduate student applying to the National Science Foundation for a predoctoral fellowship. His work in a lab where he did a rotation project was later carried on successfully by others, and it appears that a manuscript will be prepared for publication by the end of the summer. However, the fellowship application deadline is June 1, and Don decides it would be advantageous to list a publication as "submitted." Without consulting the faculty member or other colleagues involved, Don makes up a title and author list for a "submitted" paper and cites it in his application. After the application has been mailed, a lab member sees it and goes to the faculty member to ask about the "submitted" manuscript. Don admits to fabricating the submission of the paper but explains his actions by saying that he thought the practice was not uncommon in science.

The faculty members in Don's department demand that he withdraw his grant application and dismiss him from the graduate program. After leaving the university, Don applies for a master's degree, since he has fulfilled the course requirements. Although the department votes not to grant him a degree, the university administration does so because it is not stated in the university graduate bulletin that a student in Don's department must be in "good standing" to receive a degree. They fear that Don will bring suit against the university if the degree is denied. Likewise, nothing will appear in Don's university transcript regarding his dismissal.

1. Do you agree with Don that scientists often exaggerate the publication status of their work in written materials? 2. Do you think the department acted too harshly in dismissing Don from the graduate program? 3. Do you believe that being in "good standing" should be a prerequisite for obtaining an advanced degree in science? If Don later applied to a graduate program at another institution, does that institution have the right to know what happened?

Source: National Academy of Press 1995 (www.nap.edu/html/obas)

A CASE OF PLAGIARISM

May is a second-year graduate student preparing the written portion of her qualifying exam. She incorporates whole sentences and paragraphs verbatim from several published papers. She does not use quotation marks, but the sources are suggested by statements like "(see . . . for more details)." The faculty on the qualifying exam committee note inconsistencies in the writing styles of different paragraphs of the text and check the sources, uncovering May's plagiarism.

After discussion with the faculty, May's plagiarism is brought to the attention of the dean of the graduate school, whose responsibility it is to review such incidents. The graduate school regulations state that "plagiarism, that is, the failure in a dissertation, essay, or other written exercise to acknowledge ideas, research or language taken from others" is specifically prohibited. The dean expels May from the program with the stipulation that she can reapply for the next academic year.

1. Is plagiarism like this a common practice? 2. Are there circumstances that should have led to May's being forgiven for plagiarizing? 3. Should May be allowed to reapply to the program?


PUBLICATION PRACTICES

Paula, a young assistant professor, and two graduate students have been working on a series of related experiments for the past several years. During that time, the experiments have been written up in various posters, abstracts, and meeting presentations. Now it is time to write up the experiments for publication, but the students and Paula must first make an important decision. They could write a single paper with one first author that would describe the experiments in a comprehensive manner, or they could write a series of shorter, less complete papers so that each student could be a first author. Paula favors the first option, arguing that a single publication in a more visible journal would better suit all of their purposes. Paula's students, on the other hand, strongly suggest that a series of papers be prepared. They argue that one paper encompassing all the results would be too long and complex and might damage their career opportunities because they would not be able to point to a paper on which they were first authors.

1. If the experiments are part of a series, are Paula and her students justified in not publishing them together? 2. If they decided to publish a single paper, how should the listing of authors be handled? 3. If a single paper is published, how can they emphasize to the review committees and funding agencies their various roles and the importance of the paper?


CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE

Ben, a third-year graduate student, had been working on a research project that involved an important new experimental technique. For a national meeting in his discipline, Ben wrote an abstract and gave a brief presentation that mentioned the new technique. After his presentation, he was surprised and pleased when Dr. Freeman, a leading researcher from another university, engaged him in an extended conversation. Dr. Freeman asked Ben extensively about the new technique, and Ben described it fully. Ben's own faculty advisor often encouraged his students not to keep secrets from other researchers, and Ben was flattered that Dr. Freeman would be so interested in his work. Six months later Ben was leafing through a journal when he noticed an article by Dr. Freeman. The article described an experiment that clearly depended on the technique that Ben had developed. He didn't mind; in fact, he was again somewhat flattered that his technique had so strongly influenced Dr. Freeman's work. But when he turned to the citations, expecting to see a reference to his abstract or presentation, his name was nowhere to be found.

1. Does Ben have any way of receiving credit for his work? 2. Should he contact Dr. Freeman in an effort to have his work recognized? 3. Is Ben's faculty advisor mistaken in encouraging his students to be so open about their work?


A CAREER IN THE BALANCE

Francine was just months away from finishing her Ph.D. dissertation when she realized that something was seriously amiss with the work of a fellow graduate student, Sylvia. Francine was convinced that Sylvia was not actually making the measurements she claimed to be making. They shared the same lab, but Sylvia rarely seemed to be there. Sometimes Francine saw research materials thrown away unopened. The results Sylvia was turning in to their common thesis advisor seemed too clean to be real. Francine knew that she would soon need to ask her thesis advisor for a letter of recommendation for faculty and postdoc positions. If she raised the issue with her advisor now, she was sure that it would affect the letter of recommendation. Sylvia was a favorite of her advisor, who had often helped Sylvia before when her project ran into problems. Yet Francine also knew that if she waited to raise the issue the question would inevitably arise as to when she first suspected problems. Both Francine and her thesis advisor were using Sylvia's results in their own research. If Sylvia's results were inaccurate, they both needed to know as soon as possible.

1. Should Francine first try to talk with Sylvia, with her thesis advisor, or with someone else entirely? 2. Does she know enough to be able to raise concerns? 3. Where else can Francine go for information that could help her decide what to do?


REFERENCESREFERENCES

OU Research School Research Ethics WebsiteOU Research School Research Ethics Websitewww.open.ac.uk/research-ethics/index.shtmlwww.open.ac.uk/research-ethics/index.shtml

OU Strategy Unit Research Ethics WebsiteOU Strategy Unit Research Ethics Websiteintranet.open.ac.uk/strategy-unit/offices/ethics/index.shtmlintranet.open.ac.uk/strategy-unit/offices/ethics/index.shtml

OU Research Policy, Governance and InformationOU Research Policy, Governance and Informationhttp://www.open.ac.uk/research/research-school/resources/policy-information-governance.phphttp://www.open.ac.uk/research/research-school/resources/policy-information-governance.php

OU Code of Practice for Research and Those Conducting ResearchOU Code of Practice for Research and Those Conducting Researchhttp://www.open.ac.uk/research/__assets/hqsmswvsfqj1budqwg.pdfhttp://www.open.ac.uk/research/__assets/hqsmswvsfqj1budqwg.pdf

OU Ethics Principles for Research Involving Human ParticipantsOU Ethics Principles for Research Involving Human Participantshttp://www.open.ac.uk/research/__assets/zucmtefbmrivu9r1ps.pdfhttp://www.open.ac.uk/research/__assets/zucmtefbmrivu9r1ps.pdf

STM895 Postgraduate Research Skills in science, technology, STM895 Postgraduate Research Skills in science, technology, maths and computingmaths and computing

Ethical conduct in scienceEthical conduct in sciencehttp://www.open.ac.uk/StudentWeb/STM895/docs/EthicalConduct/Ethical_conduct_final.pdfhttp://www.open.ac.uk/StudentWeb/STM895/docs/EthicalConduct/Ethical_conduct_final.pdf

Intellectual property, copyright issues (‘Rights’) and responsibilities Intellectual property, copyright issues (‘Rights’) and responsibilities in researchin researchhttp://www.open.ac.uk/StudentWeb/STM895/docs/IntellectualProperty/Intellectual_copyright_final2.pdfhttp://www.open.ac.uk/StudentWeb/STM895/docs/IntellectualProperty/Intellectual_copyright_final2.pdf

http://www.open.ac.uk/research-ethics/index.shtml

http://intranet.open.ac.uk/strategy-unit/offices/ethics/index.shtml

http://www.open.ac.uk/StudentWeb/STM895/docs/EthicalConduct/Ethical_conduct_final.pdf

http://www.open.ac.uk/StudentWeb/STM895/

http://intranet.open.ac.uk/research/ethics/index.shtml

http://intranet.open.ac.uk/strategy-unit/offices/ethics/index.shtml

http://www.aaas.org/spp/video/

Documents

Ethical Conduct In Science March 2010