The Embassy of Good Science - User contributions [en]

Theme:A12b4bab-b331-46d1-93e0-dc9e9c5453cd

2020-10-28T10:10:56Z

0000-0002-3652-6640:

{{Theme
|Theme Type=Good Practices
|Has Parent Theme=Theme:639528ea-d2c2-4565-8b44-15bb9646f74b
|Title="Met de billen bloot" (airing your dirty laundry)
|Is About=“''Everybody makes mistakes, even senior researchers, even after twenty years of experience… that makes you realize that we all make mistakes. It’s about how you act when they happen that counts.''” [1]

This initiative concerns an activity that stimulates an open research culture in which research integrity issues can be discussed. The way in which this initiative tries to foster research integrity is through having face-to-face sessions about research integrity in which senior-researchers first share a personal case of ‘sloppy science’ or a research integrity dilemma. By starting with senior-researchers, the session stimulates junior- or other researchers to talk more openly about their obstacles during research projects. Whereas the session mainly aims to foster research integrity, it also stimulates trust in researchers and research so that an open environment and good communication among the researchers is fostered.

[1] ''This text is based on an interview with Mark Dubbelman, PhD student at the Alzheimer Center Amsterdam and current member of the quality committee.''
|Important For=Researchers; department leaders; Research performing organisations; Research institutions; PhD Students; Postdocs; Professors
|Has Best Practice='''How it works''' The session takes place annually in Alzheimer Center Amsterdam. All researchers are obliged to attend. Some preparation from the senior researchers in advance of the session is expected: they are asked to share an example of ‘sloppy science’ or a research integrity dilemma drawn from their personal experience. The session starts with a short introduction and is opened by the head of research. Senior researchers share their stories first, to show that issues happen to everybody, and it’s okay to talk about it. This is key to create an environment where it feels safe to speak about issues. Hearing about the issues and mistakes from the seniors stimulates junior researchers to talk more openly about the obstacles they have encountered in their research projects. The goal is not to discuss all issues during these particular sessions, but rather to keep researchers from feeling afraid or embarrassed to discuss issues during everyday research practice all year round. The session ends with educating the junior researchers about who they can talk to during the year if issues arise, as well as sharing the contact info of the hospital ombudsman.

'''Evaluation''' Whereas there has not yet been an empirical evaluation of the initiative, so far, the responses from researchers are very positive. The experience is that issues within the center are discussed timely. Researchers tend to speak first to people in their close working environment, whom they trust. Since the ‘Billen Bloot’ meetings are embedded in weekly scientific sessions, are costless, take place in the center itself and are mandatory to attend, the feasibility of the ‘Billen Bloot’ sessions is very high. This feasibility allows for a smooth implementation and therefore, it makes it a very attractive initiative.

The success of the formula in Alzheimer Center Amsterdam can partly be explained by the already open environment. It is possible that if this initiative is implemented in a less open work environment, it may be harder to make it a success.

'''What’s next?''' The ‘Billen Bloot’ sessions were initiated within the scope of the Alzheimer Center Amsterdam. However, in the last two years the initiative has been copied by other departments and institutions. Finally, researchers of Alzheimer Center Amsterdam have given presentations on the initiative to share the idea with others.
|Has Detail='''Juniors only''' In 2018, the session was extended with a second meeting where only junior researchers attend. In this session they have the opportunity to discuss issues that they did not feel comfortable to discuss with the seniors present and/or issues related to supervisors.

'''Organizing members''' The ‘Billen Bloot’ sessions are organized by and for researchers from Alzheimer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, which is also where the initiative was conceived by prof. dr. Van der Flier (head of research), in 2015. The ‘Billen Bloot’ sessions are organized by the research quality committee of the Alzheimer Center Amsterdam and receives no support from external parties.
}}
{{Related To}}
{{Tags
|Involves=Alzheimer Center Amsterdam; Astrid Hooghiemstra; Mark Dubbelman; INSPIRE
|Has Location=Amsterdam; The Netherlands
|Has Virtue And Value=Accountability; Transparency
}}

Theme:34a864d0-43b3-48bc-aaa3-438dcc124c02

2020-10-17T09:25:30Z

0000-0002-3652-6640:

{{Theme
|Theme Type=Good Practices
|Has Parent Theme=Theme:B2331451-5a6a-4aa2-a3d5-c68d2c96c8e1
|Title=Research integrity training for PhD students
|Is About=Research integrity training is an essential step at the beginning of every researcher’s career. <ref>Anderson MS, Horn AS, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, Martinson BC. What Do Mentoring and Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research Have To Do with Scientists’ Misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-Funded Scientists. Academic Medicine. 2007;82(9):853-60.</ref> As more and more emphasis is put on research integrity and research ethics, the logical step is to start cultivating knowledge about good research practices at the earliest stage of a researcher’s career. Training on how to adhere to practices for fostering research integrity, is vital for creating a better science and research culture.
<references />
|Important Because=Today, research integrity training is implemented in the curriculum of many doctoral schools as an obligatory part of postgraduate education. Alternatively, it is provided by independent research integrity bodies. Either way, the courses have the same important goal, and that is to teach young researchers how to adhere to research integrity practices and avoid involvement in research misconduct. Training on research integrity provides PhD students with knowledge of the principles of good research practice and how to foster them in their research work. Much emphasis is put on research misconduct, both on serious violations (fabrication, falsification and plagiarism), and detrimental research practices.<ref>Anderson MS, Horn AS, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, Martinson BC. What Do Mentoring and Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research Have To Do with Scientists’ Misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-Funded Scientists. Academic Medicine. 2007;82(9):853-60.</ref> Besides the theoretical part, trainings also educate on practices of a more administrative nature, e.g., how to apply to obtain ethics committee approval or how to report a case of research misconduct.
<references />
|Important For=PhD students; Early career researchers; Research integrity trainers; Trainers in training
|Has Best Practice=The regulation of research integrity training for PhD students varies among countries. Some countries oblige RI training at postgraduate level in their national codes, like Denmark in the Danish code of conduct for research integrity. <ref>Ministry of Higer Education and Science. Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. 2014. Accessed May 24 2019. Available at: <nowiki>https://ufm.dk/en/publications/2014/files-2014-1/the-danish-code-of-conduct-for-research-integrity.pdf</nowiki></ref> This code states that research integrity training must be provided by higher education institutions. Similarly, in France the Ministry of Education declared that all PhD students must be trained in research integrity and research ethics before defending their thesis. In some countries, training is provided by both universities and independent research integrity institutions. An example of the latter is Luxembourg where training for PhD students on research ethics and principles of good research practice, is conducted by the University of Luxembourg while the LARI (Luxembourg Agency for Research Integrity), an independent body, offers training for researchers from all career stages. How the training is conducted also differs. LARI offers highly interactive, face to face training, combining traditional and creative methods while the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity (TENK), for example, provides online courses for researchers.
<references />
|Has Reference=a
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:7f3a037e-4720-4564-ae17-e6a2a92adac5;Resource:4dd7fa3a-08fd-4a97-a5e4-1ca38a584d8b;Resource:8d1cf090-4db3-4305-a869-4604d8f56b45;Resource:47bfd883-c518-4a97-98fb-86b5cf442d3e
|Related To Theme=Theme:28a0859b-9e52-4af4-97f0-b0f8eeac1f1c;Theme:883697c8-d319-4224-991e-ce063d648efd;Theme:E30b6f25-2071-4f6c-80ed-7c22f9d0e4ab
}}
{{Tags
|Has Virtue And Value=Accountability; Reliability; Honesty; Respect
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Funders’ responsibilities; Institutional responsibilities
}}

Theme:34a864d0-43b3-48bc-aaa3-438dcc124c02

2020-10-17T09:23:56Z

0000-0002-3652-6640:

Theme:34a864d0-43b3-48bc-aaa3-438dcc124c02

2020-10-17T09:22:44Z

0000-0002-3652-6640:

{{Theme
|Theme Type=Good Practices
|Has Parent Theme=Theme:B2331451-5a6a-4aa2-a3d5-c68d2c96c8e1
|Title=Research integrity training for PhD students
|Is About=Research integrity training is an essential step at the beginning of every researcher’s career. <ref>Anderson MS, Horn AS, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, Martinson BC. What Do Mentoring and Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research Have To Do with Scientists’ Misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-Funded Scientists. Academic Medicine. 2007;82(9):853-60.</ref> As more and more emphasis is put on research integrity and research ethics, the logical step is to start cultivating knowledge about good research practices at the earliest stage of a researcher’s career. Training on how to adhere to practices for fostering research integrity, is vital for creating a better science and research culture.
<references />
|Important Because=Today, research integrity training is implemented in the curriculum of many doctoral schools as an obligatory part of postgraduate education. Alternatively, it is provided by independent research integrity bodies. Either way, the courses have the same important goal, and that is to teach young researchers how to adhere to research integrity practices and avoid involvement in research misconduct. Training on research integrity provides PhD students with knowledge of the principles of good research practice and how to foster them in their research work. Much emphasis is put on research misconduct, both on serious violations (fabrication, falsification and plagiarism), and detrimental research practices.<ref>Anderson MS, Horn AS, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, Martinson BC. What Do Mentoring and Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research Have To Do with Scientists’ Misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-Funded Scientists. Academic Medicine. 2007;82(9):853-60.</ref> Besides the theoretical part, trainings also educate on practices of a more administrative nature, e.g., how to apply to obtain ethics committee approval or how to report a case of research misconduct.
<references />
|Important For=PhD students; Early career researchers; Research integrity trainers; Trainers in training
|Has Best Practice=The regulation of research integrity training for PhD students varies among countries. Some countries oblige RI training at postgraduate level in their national codes, like Denmark in the Danish code of conduct for research integrity. <ref>Ministry of Higer Education and Science. Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. 2014. Accessed May 24 2019. Available at: <nowiki>https://ufm.dk/en/publications/2014/files-2014-1/the-danish-code-of-conduct-for-research-integrity.pdf</nowiki></ref>
<references />
|Has Reference=a
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:7f3a037e-4720-4564-ae17-e6a2a92adac5;Resource:4dd7fa3a-08fd-4a97-a5e4-1ca38a584d8b;Resource:8d1cf090-4db3-4305-a869-4604d8f56b45;Resource:47bfd883-c518-4a97-98fb-86b5cf442d3e
|Related To Theme=Theme:28a0859b-9e52-4af4-97f0-b0f8eeac1f1c;Theme:883697c8-d319-4224-991e-ce063d648efd;Theme:E30b6f25-2071-4f6c-80ed-7c22f9d0e4ab
}}
{{Tags
|Has Virtue And Value=Accountability; Reliability; Honesty; Respect
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Funders’ responsibilities; Institutional responsibilities
}}

Theme:34a864d0-43b3-48bc-aaa3-438dcc124c02

2020-10-17T09:19:51Z

0000-0002-3652-6640:

{{Theme
|Theme Type=Good Practices
|Has Parent Theme=Theme:B2331451-5a6a-4aa2-a3d5-c68d2c96c8e1
|Title=Research integrity training for PhD students and postdocs
|Is About=Research integrity training is an essential step at the beginning of every researcher’s career. <ref>Anderson MS, Horn AS, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, Martinson BC. What Do Mentoring and Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research Have To Do with Scientists’ Misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-Funded Scientists. Academic Medicine. 2007;82(9):853-60.</ref> As more and more emphasis is put on research integrity and research ethics, the logical step is to start cultivating knowledge about good research practices at the earliest stage of a researcher’s career. Training on how to adhere to practices for fostering research integrity, is vital for creating a better science and research culture.
<references />
|Important Because=Today, research integrity training is implemented in the curriculum of many doctoral schools as an obligatory part of postgraduate education. Alternatively, it is provided by independent research integrity bodies. Either way, the courses have the same important goal, and that is to teach young researchers how to adhere to research integrity practices and avoid involvement in research misconduct. Training on research integrity provides PhD students with knowledge of the principles of good research practice and how to foster them in their research work. Much emphasis is put on research misconduct, both on serious violations (fabrication, falsification and plagiarism), and detrimental research practices.<ref>Anderson MS, Horn AS, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, Martinson BC. What Do Mentoring and Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research Have To Do with Scientists’ Misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-Funded Scientists. Academic Medicine. 2007;82(9):853-60.</ref> Besides the theoretical part, trainings also educate on practices of a more administrative nature, e.g., how to apply to obtain ethics committee approval or how to report a case of research misconduct.
<references />
|Important For=PhD students; Early career researchers; Research integrity trainers; Trainers in training; Professors
|Has Best Practice=The regulation of research integrity training for PhD students varies among countries. Some countries oblige RI training at postgraduate level in their national codes, like Denmark in the Danish code of conduct for research integrity. <ref>Ministry of Higer Education and Science. Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. 2014. Accessed May 24 2019. Available at: <nowiki>https://ufm.dk/en/publications/2014/files-2014-1/the-danish-code-of-conduct-for-research-integrity.pdf</nowiki></ref> This code states that research integrity training must be provided by higher education institutions. Similarly, in France the Ministry of Education declared that all PhD students must be trained in research integrity and research ethics before defending their thesis. In some countries, training is provided by both universities and independent research integrity institutions. An example of the latter is Luxembourg where training for PhD students on research ethics and principles of good research practice, is conducted by the University of Luxembourg while the LARI (Luxembourg Agency for Research Integrity), an independent body, offers training for researchers from all career stages. How the training is conducted also differs. LARI offers highly interactive, face to face training, combining traditional and creative methods while the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity (TENK), for example, provides online courses for researchers.
<references />
|Has Reference=a
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:7f3a037e-4720-4564-ae17-e6a2a92adac5;Resource:4dd7fa3a-08fd-4a97-a5e4-1ca38a584d8b;Resource:8d1cf090-4db3-4305-a869-4604d8f56b45;Resource:47bfd883-c518-4a97-98fb-86b5cf442d3e
|Related To Theme=Theme:28a0859b-9e52-4af4-97f0-b0f8eeac1f1c;Theme:883697c8-d319-4224-991e-ce063d648efd;Theme:E30b6f25-2071-4f6c-80ed-7c22f9d0e4ab
}}
{{Tags
|Has Virtue And Value=Accountability; Reliability; Honesty; Respect
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Funders’ responsibilities; Institutional responsibilities
}}

Theme:34a864d0-43b3-48bc-aaa3-438dcc124c02

2020-10-17T09:18:12Z

0000-0002-3652-6640:

{{Theme
|Theme Type=Good Practices
|Has Parent Theme=Theme:B2331451-5a6a-4aa2-a3d5-c68d2c96c8e1
|Title=Research integrity training for PhD students
|Is About=Research integrity training is an essential step at the beginning of every researcher’s career. <ref>Anderson MS, Horn AS, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, Martinson BC. What Do Mentoring and Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research Have To Do with Scientists’ Misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-Funded Scientists. Academic Medicine. 2007;82(9):853-60.</ref> As more and more emphasis is put on research integrity and research ethics, the logical step is to start cultivating knowledge about good research practices at the earliest stage of a researcher’s career. Training on how to adhere to practices for fostering research integrity, is vital for creating a better science and research culture.
<references />
|Important Because=Today, research integrity training is implemented in the curriculum of many doctoral schools as an obligatory part of postgraduate education. Alternatively, it is provided by independent research integrity bodies. Either way, the courses have the same important goal, and that is to teach young researchers how to adhere to research integrity practices and avoid involvement in research misconduct. Training on research integrity provides PhD students with knowledge of the principles of good research practice and how to foster them in their research work. Much emphasis is put on research misconduct, both on serious violations (fabrication, falsification and plagiarism), and detrimental research practices.<ref>Anderson MS, Horn AS, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, Martinson BC. What Do Mentoring and Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research Have To Do with Scientists’ Misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-Funded Scientists. Academic Medicine. 2007;82(9):853-60.</ref> Besides the theoretical part, trainings also educate on practices of a more administrative nature, e.g., how to apply to obtain ethics committee approval or how to report a case of research misconduct.
<references />
|Important For=PhD students; Early career researchers; Research integrity trainers; Trainers in training
|Has Best Practice=The regulation of research integrity training for PhD students varies among countries. Some countries oblige RI training at postgraduate level in their national codes, like Denmark in the Danish code of conduct for research integrity. <ref>Ministry of Higer Education and Science. Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. 2014. Accessed May 24 2019. Available at: <nowiki>https://ufm.dk/en/publications/2014/files-2014-1/the-danish-code-of-conduct-for-research-integrity.pdf</nowiki></ref>
<references />
|Has Reference=a
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:7f3a037e-4720-4564-ae17-e6a2a92adac5;Resource:4dd7fa3a-08fd-4a97-a5e4-1ca38a584d8b;Resource:8d1cf090-4db3-4305-a869-4604d8f56b45;Resource:47bfd883-c518-4a97-98fb-86b5cf442d3e
|Related To Theme=Theme:28a0859b-9e52-4af4-97f0-b0f8eeac1f1c;Theme:883697c8-d319-4224-991e-ce063d648efd;Theme:E30b6f25-2071-4f6c-80ed-7c22f9d0e4ab
}}
{{Tags
|Has Virtue And Value=Accountability; Reliability; Honesty; Respect
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Funders’ responsibilities; Institutional responsibilities
}}

Theme:3e394ec0-7ed7-4056-b18a-9f4e3e891c32

2020-09-07T14:43:18Z

0000-0002-3652-6640:

{{Theme
|Theme Type=Misconduct & Misbehaviors
|Has Parent Theme=Theme:883697c8-d319-4224-991e-ce063d648efd
|Title=Polarized research
|Is About=Research results are presented in specific manners based on certain interests or perspectives. Polarisation occurs when researchers hold radically opposed views leading to the segregation of the scientific community into groups in part constituted by their opposition to other groups in the field. Polarisation goes beyond mere disagreement. It occurs when researchers begin (a) to self-identify as proponents of a particular position that needs to be strongly defended beyond what is supported by the data and (b) to discount arguments and data that would normally be taken as important in a scientific debate.” <ref>Ploug, T., & Holm, S. (2015). Conflict of interest disclosure and the polarisation of scientific communities.Journal of medical ethics, 41(4), 356-358.</ref>

The same data may be analysed and presented as very different results. “[https://bmcmedethics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12910-018-0243-z In polarised research scientists come to engage in facting interests instead of revealing interesting facts].” <ref>Hofmann, B. (2018). Fake facts and alternative truths in medical research.BMC medical ethics, 19(1), 4.</ref><references />
|Important Because=Polarized research is a type of bias that with basis in (covert) conflict of interest. Therefore it may misguide or distort the production of knowledge. Being aware of polarized research is tremendously important for readers of scientific papers, for researchers, for editors, for information specialists (synthesizing knowledge), and for users of scientific evidence, such as policy makers.

Results on climate change have, for example, been polarized. Moreover, there are many examples from health care, where studies of effects of various procedures vary greatly – even when based on the same data. One of the most familiar cases from health care involves studies on [https://bmcmedethics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12910-018-0243-z mammography screening] of women for breast cancer, where results on breast cancer mortality reduction and overdiagnosis vary greatly.

While professional disagreement is what drives scientific progress, polarized research hampers it, as it frequently becomes static and entrenched. It is an interesting issue whether polarized research borders on misconduct, as it involves strong and often covert conflict of interest. However, the interest is not directly related to money or profit. Alternatively, scientific conferences and consensus conferences can be one constructive manner to address the problem.
|Important For=PhD Students; Scientists; Researchers; Policy makers; Supervisors; Postdocs; Journal publishers; Junior researchers; Senior researchers; General public
|Has Best Practice=Holm and Ploug suggest that researchers should address the following two questions:

1. If the results of your current (well planned and well conducted) project point in the opposite direction of the results of your previous research on this topic, would your first reaction be to reanalyse the data and reconsider your methods, or to reconsider your previous conclusions?

2. If your findings were the exact same as the opposing researchers in this field of research, would your policy recommendations be any different from the recommendations of the opposing group? <ref>Ploug, T., & Holm, S. (2015). Conflict of interest disclosure and the polarisation of scientific communities.Journal of medical ethics, 41(4), 356-358.</ref>

Four questions about polarized research:

'''Why does polarized research exist?''' Because researchers have different perspectives and interests.

'''Is polarized research fraud?''' No, because it is based on valid scientific methods.

'''How does polarized research occur?''' Researchers may use different definitions, indexes, end-points, models, statistical methods, interpretations etc making their results come out very differently.

'''How can we avoid polarized research?''' One suggestion is to force authors to declare “polarized conflict of interest” when submitting papers. Another is to make editors and publishers check for polarized conflicts of interest.
<references />
}}
{{Related To}}
{{Tags
|Has Virtue And Value=Accountability
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Institutional responsibilities
}}

Theme:3e394ec0-7ed7-4056-b18a-9f4e3e891c32

2020-09-07T14:31:45Z

0000-0002-3652-6640:

{{Theme
|Theme Type=Misconduct & Misbehaviors
|Has Parent Theme=Theme:883697c8-d319-4224-991e-ce063d648efd
|Title=Polarized research
|Is About=Research results presented in specific manners based on certain interests or perspectives. Polarisation occurs when “reputable scientists hold radically opposed views leading to the segregation of the scientific community into groups in part constituted by their opposition to other groups in the field. Polarisation goes beyond mere disagreement. It occurs when researchers begin (a) to self-identify as proponents of a particular position that needs to be strongly defended beyond what is supported by the data and (b) to discount arguments and data that would normally be taken as important in a scientific debate.” <ref>Ploug, T., & Holm, S. (2015). Conflict of interest disclosure and the polarisation of scientific communities.Journal of medical ethics, 41(4), 356-358.</ref>

The same data may be analysed and presented as very different results. “[https://bmcmedethics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12910-018-0243-z In polarised research scientists come to engage in facting interests instead of revealing interesting facts].” <ref>Hofmann, B. (2018). Fake facts and alternative truths in medical research.BMC medical ethics, 19(1), 4.</ref>
<references />
|Important Because=Polarized research is a type of bias that with basis in (covert) conflict of interest. Therefore it may misguide or distort the production of knowledge. Being aware of polarized research is tremendously important for readers of scientific papers, for researchers, for editors, for information specialists (synthesizing knowledge), and for users of scientific evidence, such as policy makers.

Results on climate change have, for example, been polarized. Moreover, there are many examples from health care, where studies of effects of various procedures vary greatly – even when based on the same data. One of the most familiar cases from health care involves studies on [https://bmcmedethics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12910-018-0243-z mammography screening] of women for breast cancer, where results on breast cancer mortality reduction and overdiagnosis vary greatly.

While professional disagreement is what drives scientific progress, polarized research hampers it, as it frequently becomes static and entrenched. It is an interesting issue whether polarized research borders on misconduct, as it involves strong and often covert conflict of interest. However, the interest is not directly related to money or profit. Alternatively, scientific conferences and consensus conferences can be one constructive manner to address the problem.
|Important For=PhD Students; Scientists; Researchers; Policy makers; Supervisors; Postdocs; Journal publishers; Junior researchers; Senior researchers; General public
|Has Best Practice=Holm and Ploug suggest that researchers should address the following two questions:

1. If the results of your current (well planned and well conducted) project point in the opposite direction of the results of your previous research on this topic, would your first reaction be to reanalyse the data and reconsider your methods, or to reconsider your previous conclusions?

2. If your findings were the exact same as the opposing researchers in this field of research, would your policy recommendations be any different from the recommendations of the opposing group? <ref>Ploug, T., & Holm, S. (2015). Conflict of interest disclosure and the polarisation of scientific communities.Journal of medical ethics, 41(4), 356-358.</ref>

Four questions about polarized research:

'''Why does polarized research exist?''' Because researchers have different perspectives and interests.

'''Is polarized research fraud?''' No, because it is based on valid scientific methods.

'''How does polarized research occur?''' Researchers may use different definitions, indexes, end-points, models, statistical methods, interpretations etc making their results come out very differently.

'''How can we avoid polarized research?''' One suggestion is to force authors to declare “polarized conflict of interest” when submitting papers. Another is to make editors and publishers check for polarized conflicts of interest.
<references />
}}
{{Related To}}
{{Tags
|Has Virtue And Value=Accountability
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Institutional responsibilities
}}

Resource:A1f49b57-43f5-4ada-9119-5332e39679ae

2020-09-07T14:26:30Z

0000-0002-3652-6640:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=Online course: Teaching the Responsible Conduct of Research in Humans
|Is About=This web-based book provides information on Responsible conduct of research, particularly in the field of biomedicine. It uses a problem-based approach to cover a wide array of topics important to scientists conducting clinical and biomedical research. Some of the topics covered are: ethics and rules of research in humans, importance of appropriate study design, conflict of interest, genetics and stem cell research, etc.
|Important For=PhD students
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://ori.hhs.gov/education/products/ucla/default.htm
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:3d565816-370d-43a0-8cef-acb00f74f325;Resource:80680c32-bee0-4588-a2b0-7370a9f02228
|Related To Theme=Theme:34a864d0-43b3-48bc-aaa3-438dcc124c02
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=ORI
|Has Timepoint=2006
|Has Location=United States
|Has Virtue And Value=Honesty; Fairness; Responsibility
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Research with Humans; Ethics; Responsible research; Conflict of interest; Monitoring research
|Related To Research Area=LS 02 - Genetics, Genomics, Bioinformatics and Systems Biology; LS 03.12 - Stem cell biology
}}

User:0000-0002-3652-6640

2020-07-09T15:35:21Z

0000-0002-3652-6640: create user page