Research and Publication Ethics

Module 2: Scientific Conduct

Basic details

Module 2 Scientific Conduct

Teaching hours 04

Module 2: Overview of content

Scientific Conduct
1. Ethics with respect to Science and Research
2. Intellectual honesty and Research integrity
3. Scientific misconducts: Falsification, Fabrication and Plagiarism (FFP)
4. Redundant publications: Duplicate and overlapping publications, Salami slicing
5. Selective reporting and Misrepresentation of data

Topic Page no.

Learning Resource

Topic Learning resource

Ethics in Research https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resourc

es/bioethics/whatis/index.cfm

Ethics in Research https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbMR05

NkFE0
2.1 Ethics with respect to Science and Research

The most common way of defining ethics is norms for conduct that distinguish
between acceptable and unacceptable behavior. The term “Research Ethics” refers to a
wide variety of values, norms, and institutional arrangements that help constitute and
regulate scientific activities. Research ethics is a codification of scientific morality in
practice. In other words, research ethics may be referred to as doing what is morally and
legally right in research. Broadly, there are 3 different perspectives on ethics:

● Ethics as a disposition: Moral virtues are inherently present, just have to dispose
● Ethics as duty: It is one’s duty to act in a way that upholds values
● Ethics as utilitarian: Relates to principles of ethical conduct that benefits majority
of stakeholders at large

Objectives of Research ethics: [PSE] [Clue: PSG not having ethics]

● Protect human participants

● Ensure research is conducted in such a way that it serves interests of all
stakeholders, society at large
● Examine research activities for ethical soundness

It is important to adhere to ethical norms in research: [PPCAM] [PPHegde

Camera]

1. Promotes the aim of research, such as knowledge, truth, and avoidance of error.
For example, prohibitions against fabricating, falsifying, or misrepresenting
research data promotes truth and minimizes error.

2. Since research often involves a great deal of cooperation and coordination among
many different people in different disciplines and institutions, ethical standards
should promote values that are essential to collaborative work, such as trust,
accountability, mutual respect, and fairness.

3. Ethical norms must help to ensure that researchers are held accountable to the
public
 4. Ethical norms in research should also help to build public support for research.
People are more likely to fund a research project if they can trust the quality and
integrity of research.

5. Promote a variety of other important moral and social values, such as social
responsibility, human rights, animal welfare, compliance with the law, and public
health and safety.

2.1.1 Ethical Principles [HOICOTLAICRRR] [Head of the institute should

participate in CO setting and TLA process in Intelligent college thus
becoming hit like RRR movie]

Honesty: Strive for honesty in all scientific communications. Honestly report data,
results, methods and procedures, and publication status. Do not fabricate, falsify, or
misrepresent data. Do not deceive colleagues, research sponsors, or the public.

Objectivity: Strive to avoid bias in experimental design, data analysis, data

interpretation, peer review, personnel decisions, grant writing, expert testimony, and
other aspects of research where objectivity is expected or required. Avoid or minimize
bias or self-deception. Disclose personal or financial interests that may affect research.

Integrity: Keep your promises and agreements; act with sincerity; strive for
consistency of thought and action.

Carefulness: Avoid careless errors and negligence; carefully and critically examine
your own work and the work of your peers. Keep good records of research activities,
such as data collection, research design, and correspondence with agencies or journals.

Openness: Share data, results, ideas, tools, resources. Be open to criticism and new
ideas.

Transparency: Disclose methods, materials, assumptions, analyses, and other

information needed to evaluate your research.
Accountability: Take responsibility for your part in research and be prepared to give
an account (i.e. an explanation or justification) of what you did on a research project
and why.

Intellectual Property: Honor patents, copyrights, and other forms of intellectual

property. Do not use unpublished data, methods, or results without permission. Give
proper acknowledgement or credit for all contributions to research. Never plagiarize.

Confidentiality: Protect confidential communications, such as papers or grants

submitted for publication, personnel records, trade or military secrets, and patient
records.

Responsible Publication: Publish in order to advance research and scholarship, not

to advance just your own career. Avoid wasteful and duplicative publication.

Responsible Mentoring: Help to educate, mentor, and advise students. Promote

their welfare and allow them to make their own decisions.

Respect for Colleagues: Respect your colleagues and treat them fairly

Social Responsibility: Strive to promote social good and prevent or mitigate social
harms through research, public education, and advocacy.

Non-Discrimination: Avoid discrimination against colleagues or students on the

basis of sex, race, ethnicity, or other factors not related to scientific competence and
integrity.

Competence: Maintain and improve your own professional competence and expertise
through lifelong education and learning; take steps to promote competence in science as
a whole.

Legality: Know and obey relevant laws and institutional and governmental policies.

Animal Care: Show proper respect and care for animals when using them in research.
Do not conduct unnecessary or poorly designed animal experiments.
Human Subjects protection: When conducting research on human subjects,
minimize harms and risks and maximize benefits; respect human dignity, privacy, and
autonomy; take special precautions with vulnerable populations; and strive to distribute
the benefits and burdens of research fairly.

Summary:
● Ethics: Moral code to distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable
behavior; States what is legally and morally right; concerned with values that
constitute and regulate scientific activities; Scientific morality
● Ethics as disposition (inherent), duty (uphold values) and utilitarian
(stakeholders)
● Objectives: Protect participants, Ensure societal benefit, Examine for Ethical
soundness
● Ethical norms should: Promote aim of research, Encourage collaboration,
Accountability, Gain public support, Promote social and ethical values
● Ethical principles: Honesty, Competence, Relevance, Transparency, Respect,
Impartiality, Accountability, Responsible publication and so on

2.2 Intellectual honesty and Research integrity

Intellectual Honesty: Researchers have a moral duty to be honest. This duty is

especially important when we share ideas that can inform or persuade others.
Intellectual honesty is honesty in the acquisition, analysis, and transmission of ideas. A
person is being intellectually honest when he or she, knowing the truth, states that
truth.

Intellectual honesty is an applied method of problem solving, characterized by an

unbiased, honest attitude, which can be demonstrated in a number of different ways
including: [IOUP] [Soup with I]

● Ensuring support for chosen ideologies does not interfere with the pursuit of
truth
 ● Relevant facts and information are not purposefully omitted even when such
things may contradict one's hypothesis
● Facts are presented in an unbiased manner, and not twisted to give misleading
impressions or to support one view over another
● References, or earlier work, are acknowledged where possible, and plagiarism is
avoided

Intellectual Honesty (Individual level) [APAPCCDOOHICA] [Opening Cafe

coffee day in Andhra pradesh with High command’s acknowledgement]

● Research should be based on originality and innovation

● Accuracy in representing contributions

● Protect identity of respondent

● Due acknowledgement of web based resources

● No to Plagiarism

● Citing all related papers including those submitted, but not accepted

● Revealing conflict of interest or potential ones

● Avoid duplicate publication

● Avoid Guest, Ghost and Gift authorship

● Adopt best practices recommended by COPE (Submit, encourage and behavior)

● Respect Intellectual property

● Be honest and objective while submission

● All communication between author and journal should be treated as confidential

Intellectual Honesty (Publisher level) [ACCCBV] [In constructing CCD, use

ACC cement because it will ensure victory]
 ● Adherence to ethical practices (COPE or WAME)

● Reveal conflict of interest

● Treat all information in the article as confidential

● Be vigilant in spotting ethical misconduct

● Motive is building better society, not commercial purpose

● Avoid predatory or bogus journals

Research integrity: Research integrity may be defined as active adherence to the

ethical principles and professional standards essential for the responsible practice of
research:

● By active adherence we mean adoption of the principles and practices as a

personal credo, not simply accepting them as impositions by rule makers

● By ethical principles we mean honesty, trustworthiness, and high regard for the
scientific record

The integrity of research depends on honesty and trust. Research integrity includes:

● Use of honest and verifiable methods in proposing, performing and evaluating

research
● Reporting research results with particular attention to rules, regulations and
guidelines
● Following commonly accepted professional codes or norms

Research integrity means conducting research according to the highest professional and
ethical standards, so that the results are trustworthy. It concerns the behavior of
researchers at all stages of the research life-cycle, including:

● Declaring competing interests

● Data collection and data management
● Using appropriate methodology
 ● Drawing conclusions from results
● Writing up research findings

Research integrity can be confused with research ethics and publishing ethics. Although
these terms are connected, there are differences. Research ethics is specifically
concerned with the ethical issues which may arise when conducting research involving
animals or human subjects.

“For individuals, research integrity is an aspect of moral character and experience. It

involves above all a commitment to intellectual honesty and personal responsibility for
one's actions and to a range of practices that characterize responsible research conduct”.
These practices include:

Integrity at individual level:

● Honesty and fairness in proposing, performing, and reporting research

● Accuracy and fairness in representing contributions to research proposals and

reports

● Proficiency and fairness in peer review

● Collegiality in scientific interactions, communications and sharing of resources

● Disclosure of conflicts of interest

● Protection of human subjects in the conduct of research

● Humane care of animals in the conduct of research

● Adherence to the mutual responsibilities of mentors and trainees

While science encourages vigorous defense of one's ideas and work, ultimately research
integrity means examining the data with objectivity and being guided by the results
rather than by preconceived notions.
Integrity at institutional level:

● Provide leadership

● Encourage respect for everyone

● Promote productive interactions

● Adherence to rules

● Anticipate, reveal and manage individual and institutional conflict of interest

● Adherence to rule based mechanism

● Timely and thorough investigations and appropriate administrative actions in

relation to scientific misconduct

● Offer educational opportunities in promoting integrity

● Monitor and evaluate the ecosystem for continuous quality improvement

Publishing ethics is related to the integrity of the publication process, rather than the
conduct of the research itself. Publishing ethics cover a range of issues, such as:

● Dual submission

● Authorship disputes

● Bias in peer review

● Breaches of confidentiality in peer review

Summary:
● Intellectual honesty is honesty in the acquisition, analysis, and transmission of
ideas. A person is being intellectually honest when he or she, knowing the
truth, states that truth.

● Intellectual honesty can be demonstrated by creating an ecosystem which

 promotes pursuit of truth, discourages plagiarism, ensures unbiased
presentation of facts and so on

● Intellectual honesty is to be promoted at both individual and publisher level

● Research integrity may be defined as active adherence to the ethical principles

and professional standards essential for the responsible practice of research

● Adopting, not just acceptance; Following professional codes, imbibing ethical

values, attention to rules, honest and verifiable methods

● Research integrity is to be promoted at both individual and institutional level

2.3 Scientific misconducts: Falsification, Fabrication and Plagiarism (FFP)

Scientific misconduct is the violation of the standard codes of scholarly conduct and
ethical behavior in the publication of professional scientific research. Research related
misconduct can occur at any stage of the research cycle. Research is the driving force for
innovations and technical advancement in the world. Research misconduct is defined as
“fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing or reviewing research,
or in reporting of research results”. It is on the rise because:

● Increasing emphasis on research by academic institutions

● Difficulty in publishing in standard journals
● Constant pressure in the academic ecosystem
● Lack of systematic reporting standards

Some common examples are: Misappropriation of Ideas, Plagiarism, Self-plagiarism,

Falsification of Data, Failure to Support Validation of Your Research and so on
1. Falsification: Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or
processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not
accurately represented in the research record.
2. Fabrication: Fabrication is the construction and/or addition of data,
observations, or characterizations that never occurred in the gathering of data or
running of experiments. Claims about results need to be made on complete data
sets (as is normally assumed), where claims made based on incomplete or
assumed results is a form of fabrication. The validity of knowledge created by
science and the credibility of science, truth and trust, are undermined by
fabrication. When detected, the sanctions for perpetrators can be severe and
articles will be retracted. Not only does fabrication affect scientific careers, but
when fabricated data is presented to be real and is consequently used in real-life
practice it can have life-threatening consequences. One case of research
misconduct estimates that up to 800,000 lives were lost due to fabrication of
data of a single perpetrator.
3. Plagiarism: Plagiarism is presenting someone else's work or ideas as your own,
with or without their consent, by incorporating it into your work without full
acknowledgement. All published and unpublished material, whether in
manuscript, printed or electronic form, is covered under this definition. It paints
a misleading picture of a researcher's own contribution.
Plagiarism can involve copying words or images directly, paraphrasing sentences

or passages, or co-opting someone else’s ideas without citing the original work. In

academic writing, these are various types of plagiarism you might encounter:

● Global plagiarism means plagiarizing an entire text. This includes

purchasing an essay or turning in an assignment completed by someone

else.

● Patchwork or mosaic plagiarism means copying phrases, passages,

and ideas from different sources and compiling them into a new text.

● Incremental plagiarism means inserting a small amount of plagiarized

content in a mostly original text.

● Self-plagiarism means recycling your own previous work that you’ve

already submitted or published.

 ● Plagiarism can be avoided by adopting following tips: Don’t just copy, Use

a range of sources, Develop your own style, Use quotation marks, Keep

good quality notes.

Summary:
● Scientific misconduct is the violation of the standard codes of scholarly conduct
and ethical behavior in the publication of professional scientific research
● Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in
proposing, performing or reviewing research, or in reporting of research results
● Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or
changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately
represented in the research record.
● Fabrication is the construction and/or addition of data, observations, or
characterizations that never occurred in the gathering of data or running of
experiments
● Plagiarism is presenting someone else's work or ideas as your own
● Types of Plagiarism: Global: Entire text, Patchwork: From different sources,
Incremental: Small part in a largely original text, Self: Recycling one’s previous
work

2.4 Redundant publications: Duplicate and overlapping publications, Salami

slicing

Redundant publications: Duplicate and overlapping publications

● Redundant publication (salami publishing) is publication of a paper that

overlaps substantially with one already published in print or electronic form
● It occurs when 2 or more papers without appropriate full cross reference, share
the same hypothesis, data, sample size, methodology or similar results and
conclusions
 ● One study is split into several parts and submitted to two or more journals, Or
the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper
cross-referencing, permission or justification.
● Factors leading to redundant publication:
○ Publishing papers from one’s own dissertation
○ Reporting on a longitudinal program of study
○ Writing same content in various languages
○ Writing same content for different audiences
● Following problem are created because of redundant publications:
○ Precious time being wasted of peer-reviewers and editors
○ Leads to flawed meta-analysis
○ Distort academic reward systems
○ Infringement of copyright
○ Inflates scientific literature for no benefits other than the author

Duplicate and Overlapping publications:

● Duplicate (form of redundant) publication occurs when an author reuses

substantial parts of their own published work without providing the appropriate
references. This can range from publishing an identical paper in multiple
journals, to only adding a small amount of new data to a previously published
paper.
● Secondary publication is an acceptable type of publication – the publication
of the same article for different audiences – for example, in a different journal or
in a different language
● Secondary publication is acceptable if: Approval from both editors, Different
audience, Faithful reflection of data, Primary reference is stated in footnote of
title page
● How to identify duplicate publications?
○ Reproduction of an article already published using identical sample and
outcomes
○ Assembly of 2 or more articles to produce new one
 ○ Reporting different outcomes from same study sample
○ New data is added to a preliminary article
○ Reporting part of a large trial and reporting identical outcomes
● Problems caused by duplicate publication:
○ They waste finite resources. Journals have a limited number of pages
available and duplicate submissions will be reviewed twice, indexed twice,
copyedited twice, distributed twice and so on.
○ They overload available information. It simply takes longer to find what
you need.
○ They overemphasize the findings
○ Duplicate publications contravene copyright law, if you have signed your
copyright across to another journal. This is less of a problem these days
with Open Access, where the requirement for an author to hand over
copyright is becoming rare
● How to avoid duplicate publications?
○ No need to repeat unless further confirmation
○ Cite all related papers, including those submitted, but not yet accepted
○ Full disclosure about previous publications
○ Being clear about new information
○ Disclose full details of related papers
○ Emphasis on quality over quantity
○ Awareness programs
○ Strict rules and penalties
● Overlapping publication: For research reports: when two (or more) articles
report the same analysis of the same data set, or contain relatively small amounts
of new data or alternative analyses compared with the original publication,
particularly when this is done in such a way that reviewers/readers are unlikely to
realize that some of the findings have been published before
● For reviews and editorials: when two (or more) review articles or editorials
include material that has been published elsewhere by the author(s)
Salami Slicing
● Publication of two or more articles derived from a single study
● Articles of such type report on data collected from a single study split into several
segments just large enough to gain reasonable results and conclusions, also
known as “minimal publishable unit”
● The problematic act of dividing a research report in small units for the sake of
multiple publications
● Splitting of data derived from a single research idea into multiple smaller
“publishable” units or “slices
● Involves breaking up or segmenting a large study in to two or more publications
● Why is it bad?
○ Distortion of the literature by leading unsuspecting readers to believe that
data presented in each salami slice (i.e., journal article) is derived from a
different subject sample
○ Skews the scientific database
○ Creates repetition that wastes readers’ time as well as the time of editors
and reviewers, who must handle each paper separately
○ Inflates the author’s citation record
● When is it justified?
○ If a major research project is so extensive that it involves several research
groups across disciplines, then it is justified that there are multiple
publications to convey the overall impact of the research

Summary:
● Redundant publication (salami publishing) is publication of a paper that
overlaps substantially with one already published in print or electronic form
● Duplicate (form of redundant) publication occurs when an author reuses
substantial parts of their own published work without providing the
appropriate references
● Factors: Own dissertation, Different audiences, Different languages
 ● Problems caused: Waste resources, Overload inf, Overemphasize findings,
Contravene copyright laws, Distort academic reward systems
● How to avoid: Cite, Disclosure, Being clear, Awareness, Strict rules and
penalties
● Secondary publication is an acceptable type of publication – the publication of
the same article for different audiences
● Overlapping publication is when two (or more) articles report the same analysis
of the same data set
● Salami Slicing: Publication of two or more articles derived from a single study
● Why bad?: Repetition, Inflates academic record, skews database, Distortion of
literature

2.5 Selective reporting and misrepresentation of data

● Selective reporting bias is when results from scientific research are deliberately
not fully or accurately reported, in order to suppress negative or undesirable
findings
● Selective reporting bias can incorporate a number of other types of bias, such as:
○ Publication bias: Results of negative clinical trials are not published or
under-published
○ Outcome reporting bias: Results of negative clinical trials are
cherry-picked or distorted to improve the overall findings
○ Spin: Communicating results in a way which amplifies positive findings
or tones down negative findings
○ Citation bias: Positive studies are more likely to be cited than negative
studies
○ Design bias: Research team creates the process in which the experiment
will be performed. If there isn’t a wide enough selection of demographics
and a large enough population in the data pool, design bias could exist.
This is where selective reporting also sneaks in. If a population of people
 are omitted that could be affected by the study, the final outcome could be
invalid.
○ Procedural bias: Procedural bias can occur when a researcher decides
that the next step in an experiment should go a predetermined way,
whether the results of the previous step demonstrate that direction or not.
This frequently happens when the researcher is rushed, a time limit is in
place, resources and funds have to be considered, or faulty equipment is
used.
○ Personal biases: The most difficult types of biases to avoid are personal
biases because they are part of the researcher’s character the scholar may
not even realize they exist. Personal bias influences data collection when
the interviewer is unconsciously or purposely using body language to get
the respondent to answer a question in a certain way, or they can occur
when the researcher is determining the importance of qualitative data and
chooses to omit data because of a stereotype or belief they have that a
certain demographic is not as important as another.
● Factors leading to Selective reporting:
○ Omitting outcomes from the final publication of a study because of a
selective decision that those findings were not significant enough to
warrant being included in the article
○ Choosing data based on personal choices rather than including all
collected data for a clear picture
○ Only reporting subsets of the data collected instead of using all the data to
demonstrate a full understanding of a subject
○ Choosing to under-report data because of a decision that the changes in
the collected information were not deemed to be significant by the
researcher

Misrepresentation of data:

● Misrepresenting data include drawing unwarranted inference from data, creating

deceptive graphs of figures, and using suggestive language for rhetorical effect;
 Interpretation of the results that is not consistent with the actual results of the
study. This type of spin will alter the readers' critical appraisal of the study and
could impact the interpretation of evidence synthesis.
● There are three types of misrepresentations:
○ Innocent misrepresentation: False claim regarding a study when
knows it isn't true
○ Negligent misrepresentation
○ Fraudulent misrepresentation
● Misrepresentation of data is ‘communicating honestly reported data in a
deceptive manner.’ But what is deceptive communication? The use of statistics
presents researchers with numerous opportunities to misrepresent data. For
example, one might use a statistical technique, such as multiple regression or the
analysis of variance, to make one's results appear more significant or convincing
than they really are. Or one might eliminate (or trim) outliers when ‘cleaning up’
raw data. Other ways of misrepresenting data include drawing unwarranted
inference from data, creating deceptive graphs of figures, and using suggestive
language for rhetorical effect.
● Manipulation of images:
○ Image tampering
○ Usage of filters to manipulate images
○ Resizing of image
○ Using same image to represent different results
○ Distorting visual representation such as increasing brightness
● Guidelines to prevent manipulation of images:
○ Authors must provide original unprocessed images
○ Journal guidelines deal with the subject
○ Adjustments are only acceptable if they apple equally across the entire
image
○ Checking correctness of images
● How to avoid data misrepresentation?
○ Analyze complete data
 ○ Use appropriate tools depending on type of data
○ Put data in context
○ Avoid patterns of association between only 2 points
○ Data should be presented such that it is easily understandable
○ All data fields be appropriately labeled
○ Any special message if associated with data, should be clearly specified
● Data access and retention
○ Purpose: Further use
○ All data in relation to a research paper should be retained for a reasonable
time after publication

Summary:
● Selective reporting bias is when results from scientific research are deliberately
not fully or accurately reported in order to suppress negative or undesirable
findings
● Types: Publication, Outcome reporting, Spin, Citation, Design, Procedural,
Personal
● Factors: Under-reporting, Selective reporting, Selective choice making in use of
data, Selective decision making in publishing findings
● Misrepresenting data include drawing unwarranted inference from data,
creating deceptive graphs, using suggestive language and so on
● Why not? - Alter Critical appraisal, Impact Evidence synthesis
● Types: Innocent, Negligent, Fraudulent
● How? - Use of statistics, Trimming, Manipulating images, and so on
● Manipulation of images: Image tampering, Resizing, Use of filter, Distorting
image properties, Duplication
● How to prevent it (Publisher)? - Strict journal guidelines, Control mechanism,
Awareness, Collecting original images, Changes to be made across the whole
image
● How to avoid it (Author)? - Appropriate tools, Contextual data, Easy
representation
● Data access and retention: Future use