Langlais 2012 Science & Engr Ethics 18(3) 551-555

Academic Medicine, 2010

Ms. Antes is a PhD candidate,

2017

The ultimate purpose in studying ethics is not as it is in other inquiries, the attainment of theoretical knowledge; we are not conducting this inquiry in order to know what virtue is, but in order to become good…" ~ Nicomachean Ethics, Book 2, Chapter 2 (1) To become good throughout one's career, and indeed throughout one's life, is not a journey with a defined end point, but a continuous process that requires integrity, honesty, and frequent self-reflection. In the field of scientific research, both innovation and accurate reporting of information are critical to society, and society implicitly trusts scientists and researchers to be ethical and honest in their work. The need for data reliability has become even more profound as technology advances at an ever increasing rate. Indeed, the tools of "big data," with its advances in statistical applications, have made it easier than ever to detect unethical behavior. Once an individual is associated with such behavior-once the implicit trust in their scientific integrity is broken-it becomes almost impossible to recover that reputation. When beginning the educational process, one's reputation is unvarnished, and during advancement into and through the workplace, this reputation for honesty and integrity should likewise progress. Without a doubt, this integrity is critical to find employment, to obtain research grants, to disseminate important findings, and generally to be a successful and respected scientific professional. Unethical behavior has occurred for centuries and has been perpetrated by famous scientists, including Isaac Newton, John Dalton, and Robert Millikan (2; 3). The offenses are often revealed in data that were "too good," lacking even a hint of random-and perfectly acceptable-error or variation. Even today, statistical rigor and proper experimental design are lacking in many studies. Yet not all misconduct involves data falsification ("cleaning of the data") or data fabrication ("making up the data"). Plagiarism and misappropriation of contribution are forms of theft that intrude on proper acknowledgment of the original work, which cost the true owner time, effort, and, in many cases, money. For the individual committing such a theft, there could be gratification and recognition in the short term… until the offense is discovered. Despite the risks and unethical nature of such behavior, studies have shown that plagiarism occurs more often than commonly appreciated (4). This document serves as an introduction to the importance of ethical behavior in scientific research, beginning with some well-known examples of unethical conduct and their severe consequences. For additional examples, the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Office of Research Integrity lists case studies of misconduct dating back to 2008 (5). Many of these cases involve data fabrication or falsification in scientific publications, poster sessions, and grant applications. Like DHHS, the National Science Foundation maintains a compendium of misconduct investigations available to the public (6). Cases can be searched by the type of misconduct in 32 categories, such as plagiarism, data tampering, data falsification, sabotage, and intellectual theft. This database also identifies the repercussions in these cases; a brief scan reveals that punishments can be severe, possibly involving job loss, revoked academic degrees, and even criminal charges.

Ethics & …, 2009

Differences across fields and experience levels are frequently considered in discussions of ethical decision making and ethical behavior. In the present study, doctoral students in the health, biological, and social sciences completed measures of ethical decision making. The effects of field and level of experience with respect to ethical decision making, metacognitive reasoning strategies, social-behavioral responses, and exposure to unethical events were examined. Social and biological scientists performed better than health scientists with respect to ethical decision making. Furthermore, the ethical decision making of health science students decreased as experience increased. Moreover, these effects appeared to be linked to the specific strategies underlying participants' ethical decision making. The implications of these findings for ethical decision making are discussed.

JAMA: the journal of the …, 1998

Context.-The professional integrity of scientists is important to society as a whole and particularly to disciplines such as medicine that depend heavily on scientific advances for their progress.

2021

The article presents academics’ perceptions on research integrity and teaching integrity and ethics. The empirical basis of the article is a qualitative analysis of data based on open questions from two online surveys conducted among scientists, academic teachers and students. We point out two ways of defining scientific integrity: (1) as a common challenge for the academic community arising from the relationship between science and society; (2) as an individual choice and one’s capital in achieving scientific success. We describe the respondents’ views on the process of teaching integrity and ethics, rooted in a values-based approach to integrity. In this approach, teaching is open to the use of dialogical methods and takes into account the relative nature of the subjects being taught – research integrity and ethics. In our analyses, we focus on a positive approach to research integrity and show that it has great potential to raise the awareness of the scientific community about th...

Clinical and Translational Science, 2013

We both share decades long commitments to the promise that biomedical research holds for improving the health and lives of so many people. It is also clear to us that, given that its goal is to improve our collective well-being, research, at its most fundamental level, is a deeply moral endeavor. Th us we also share a strong commitment both to the role of ethics in educating researchers and understanding how to meaningfully engage and interest researchers-in-training in ethics. We have watched in disappointment at times, though, to see how little interest some in the science academy can have in the role of ethics in science learning, especially at the graduate and postgraduate levels. Too oft en we see a complacency and a sense that ethics teaching, if there is going to be any, is best turfed to others. Th us we were heartened to read the most recent report of the United States' Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues, for it has many thoughtful comments consistent with our sentiments about the need to drastically improve how research ethics is taught to biomedical researchers. Th eir report, "Moral Science: Protecting Participants in Human Subjects Research, " speaks eloquently about the need for the research community to enjoy the "earned confi dence" of the public if there is to be a successful research enterprise. 1 Th ey set forth several recommendations that can contribute to this confi dence, including a recommendation to "create a culture of responsibility" in the research community. Th e Commission viewed a commitment to "creative, fl exible, and innovative educational approaches" 1 , p.72 to the ethics of research as central to eff orts to create such a culture, arguing that "ethics education [should] play an increasingly central role in advancing research ethics. " 1, p.73 Th e Commission's recommendations about ethics education occur against a backdrop of some considerable global emphasis already in place on instruction in research ethics, including the responsible conduct of research (RCR). For example, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) 2 and National Science Foundation (NSF), 3 the European Science Foundation, 4 the Council of Canadian Academies, 5 the British Department for Business Innovation and Skills, 6 and, most recently, the II Brazilian Meeting on Research Integrity, Science and Publication Ethics 7 all call for science training programs to include research ethics instruction in their curricula. NIH and NSF go so far as to

In recent years there has been an increasing recognition that becoming an ethical scientist may not happen by osmosis. Teaching research ethics has therefore become an integral part of many university curricula. In the United States, the Office for Research Integrity has identified nine core areas for consideration regarding the responsible conduct of research. These are: (i) Research misconduct; (ii) Protection of human subjects; (iii) Animal use and welfare; (iv) Conflicts of interest; (v) Data management; (vi) Mentor/Trainee responsibilities; (vii) Collaborative research; (viii) Authorship and publication; and (ix) Peer review. These components are clearly most applicable to the training of postgraduate students but have relevance for undergraduates both in the preparation for a research project and also as part of their broader education regarding the nature of scientific research (see, for example, http://nationalethicsresourcecenter.net/undergrads).

Ethics & Behavior, 2009

Scholars have proposed a number of courses and programs intended to improve the ethical behavior of scientists in an attempt to maintain the integrity of the scientific enterprise. In the present study, we conducted a quantitative meta-analysis based on 26 previous ethics program evaluation efforts, and the results showed that the overall effectiveness of ethics instruction was modest. The effects of ethics instruction, however, were related to a number of instructional program factors, such as course content and delivery methods, in addition to factors of the evaluation study itself, such as the field of investigator and criterion measure utilized. An examination of the characteristics contributing to the relative effectiveness of instructional programs revealed that more successful programs were conducted as seminars separate from the standard curricula rather than being embedded in existing courses. Furthermore, more successful programs were case-based, interactive and allowed participants to learn and practice the application of real-world ethical decision-making skills. The implications of these findings for future course development and evaluation are discussed. Keywords ethics; scientific ethics; ethics instruction; ethics training; meta-analysis Cases of scientific misconduct range from extremely serious events, such as blatant fabrication of study findings and harm to research participants (Resnick, 2003), to less serious, yet more prevalent, instances of misbehavior, such as inappropriate assignment of authorship and withholding details of methodology or results in publications (Martinson, Anderson, & De Vries, 2005). Regrettably, instances of misconduct undermine progress in science and, moreover, create a sense of distrust for science among the public and breed distrust within the scientific community (Abbott, 1999; Friedman, 2002; Kalichman, 2007). As the nature of science continues to become increasingly competitive, interdisciplinary, and global, not only do new ethical considerations enter the field, but the implications of scientific misconduct become even more significant. Thus, it is not surprising that the scientific community is paying

Academic Medicine, 2007

Purpose The authors examine training in the responsible conduct of research and mentoring in relation to behaviors that may compromise the integrity of science. Method The analysis is based on data from the authors' 2002 national survey of 4,160 early-career and 3,600 midcareer biomedical and social science researchers who received research support from the U.S. National Institutes of Health. The authors used logistic regression analysis to examine associations between receipt of separate or integrated training in research ethics, mentoring related to ethics and in general, and eight categories of ethically problematic Please see the end of the report for information about the authors.

SciDoc Publishers, 2021

Introduction: The research ethics provides guidelines to apply moral regulations and professional codes of conduct in the various steps of research. The research ethics plays a very vital role in the collection, analysis, reporting, and publication of details about research subjects, in particular active acceptance of participant’s right to privacy, confidentiality and the informed consent of the participant. Aims: To assess the Knowledge, awareness and attitudes about research ethics among the faculty and students of medical and dental colleges and the requirement for a regular teaching about research ethics among the faculty and students of medical and dental colleges. Materials & Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted by assessing the responses to 39 selected basic questions regarding Knowledge, awareness and attitudes about research ethics among a total of 415 faculty members and post graduate students of the medical and dental institutions in Karnataka. The questionnaire was made into 5 categories. Chi-square tests was used to determine, in bivariate analyses, the association of each of the independent variables like their speciality, their academic position, prior ethics training, and their prior involvement with research with each of the main outcome of interest. The students t-test was done to assess the respondents scores on the 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5 (1-strongly disagree, 2-disagree, 3-not sure, 4-agree and 5-strongly agree). The average of their scores were compared among the various variable like their specialty and academic position by using the ANOVA test. Results: A total of 415 responses were obtained from the participants of the study. Out of this we had 273 respondents as female and 142 respondents as male. Among these 225 respondents were from the medical speciality and 190 from the dental speciality. The P value was kept at 0.05 for this study. Conclusion: The participants of the questionnaire survey showed that the institutional ethics committees would be very useful for promoting health research and are imperative for appraisal of the health research projects.The majority of the respondents agreed that they were well aware of the ethical guidelines governing the human research, but when we assess the respondent’s knowledge and attitudes towards research ethics there seems to be a lacuna in complete awareness and knowledge of research ethics. The results of the study also helped us to assess the requirement for a regular teaching about research ethics among the faculty and students of medical and dental colleges.