Text (Instruction Step Text)
From The Embassy of Good Science
Describe the actions the user should take to experience the material (including preparation and follow up if any). Write in an active way.
- ⧼SA Foundation Data Type⧽: Text
4
This module explores how virtues are taught or learned, and introduces the concept of a moral exemplar. It therefore discusses the responsibilities of a supervisor, or what a good role model/a good mentor entails.
[[File:How Virtues are Taught.jpg|link=http://courses.embassy.science/how_virtues_are_taught/story.html]]
If you want to integrate this module into your institution's learning management system, you may download it as a SCORM Package [http://courses.embassy.science/How%20virtues%20are%20taught_SCORM.zip here] +
This exercise supports participants in identifying research integrity (RI) principles, virtues and misconduct in a case and provides a framework to consider, choose and defend alternative courses of action regarding realistic dilemmas in research integrity.
[[File: DGE.png|link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qpq-oWPdvJQ&list=PLabbUwyulAry4tzZ12eHl5JOJhJGiaE6k&index=6]] +
During the 2019 World Conference on Research Integrity in Hong Kong, we asked experts to explain the concept of Research Integrity. <br />
[[File: What is research integrity3.png|link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIIjtAgkfr4&list=PLabbUwyulArzx9SIqxfDXbtTELS8uWdFD&index=5]] +
During the 2019 World Conference on Research Integrity in Hong Kong, we asked experts on the importance and usefulness of Research Integrity networks.
[[File: Research Integrity Networks3.png|link=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCv718oBPl0]] +
This module explores, whether the experience of cognitive dissonance or moral distress may pose a possible necessity to transform distress into eustress, that is, into a positive incentive to cultivate virtues. The relevance of five virtues is further explained with a hypothetical situation, in which a researcher is confronted with clear evidence that undermines the theory he/she has been working on (and building his/her academic self-concept around).
[[File:To Make a Virtue of Necessity.jpg|link=http://courses.embassy.science/to_make_a_virtue_of_necessity/story.html]]
If you want to integrate this module into your institution's learning management system, you may download it as a SCORM Package [http://courses.embassy.science/To%20make%20a%20virtue%20of%20necessity_SCORM.zip here] +
04 - Moral Case Deliberation: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity +
The fourth step aims to foster a clear understanding of the situation so that participants can ‘put themselves in the shoes’ of the case presenter. Clarification aims to (re)construct as clearly as possible the situation presented by the case presenter in order to investigate the moral dilemma. Within MCD, participants try to answer the dilemma with which the case presenter is faced. +
A moral question is a situation in which moral duties are clear to the subject, although they may be in conflict with other issues of interest to the agent such as financial and political interests. These situations do not require moral deliberation so much as moral courage. Moral disagreements arise when the agent feels subjectively certain but holds a point of view in conflict with another persons’ moral judgments. These situations call for moral dialogue and argumentation. Finally, moral conflicts (or moral problems) arise when agents face conflicting moral duties. These instances call for moral deliberation. +
Communicate my Early View and associated reasons to the rest of the committee +
02 - The Seven Steps Method: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity +
Be imaginative, try to avoid “dilemma”; not “yes” or “no” but whom to go to, what to say. +
Start a debate: invite both subgroups to convince the other side of their position. As a moderator, you can challenge the participants if only a few people talk. In general, try not to intervene too much during the debate, even when participants start raising their voices. Stop the debate if you see people becoming too emotional and ask them what is triggering them to become emotional in terms of aggression, sadness etc.
In case the participants are debating too politely, you should intervene actively as a moderator and challenge both groups to convince each other. You might even make stimulating comments such as:
**
*Come on, do you really think that …….? (repeat what has been said by one of the participants)
*What makes you think that this argument counts? +
Read about the concept of debate and dialogue and reflect on the differences between the two.
Open the page about [https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:6217d06b-c907-4b09-af4e-b4c8a17b9847 dialogue versus debate]. +
a. Ask each trainee to recall the specific situation they experienced (this was part of the assignment prior to this meeting\exercise which you as trainer distributed before to the session). This should be a situation from their own research in which they had concerns about research integrity (or a virtue related to research integrity such as honesty, reliability, accountability), and in which they were morally in doubt about how to act.
b. Ask trainees to select one virtue which was at stake in their specific situation. Ask trainees to check whether and to what degree the virtues/principles mentioned in the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity are relevant here. If so, in which way? If not, why not?
c. Ask trainees to reflect on which behavior does justice to the virtue at stake in the situation. A balancing act is always required to determine the right course of action. To reflect on this, ask participants to reflect on their own situation and imagine a continuum. For example, if courage is the selected virtue:
coward behavior -------------- courageous behavior-------------------- reckless behavior
d. Invite participants to write down three kinds of possible behaviors in relation to the research integrity case, guided by the following questions (please ask the participants to use the handout 1 in the practical tips section):
1) What would you do if your behavior represents too much of the specific virtue? In other words, what would you do concretely if the virtue is too strong (right end of the spectrum)?
2) What would you do if your behavior represents too little of the specific virtue? In other words, what would you do concretely if the virtue which should guide your behavior is not prominent enough (left end of the spectrum)?
3) What would you do if you demonstrated the right behavior which perfectly represents your specific virtue in that situation? This is dependent on your convictions and the particular person you are in that specific context. In this case, your behavior representing the specific virtue will be neither too strong and nor too weak. You stand between both extremes in your actions/thoughts/decisions as a researcher. This is the middle position.
<br />
Introduce yourself. Briefly inform participants about the background, the aim, and the description of the game. Emphasize that the information shared during the exercise should be kept confidential. +
In playing the game, you will read hypothetical cases concerning research integrity dilemmas. You will need to decide which of the four proposed courses of action to take in relation to the dilemmas.
The trainer might share these dilemmas on a slide or flip board, or she/he might make use of the [https://www.eur.nl/en/about-eur/policy-and-regulations/integrity/research-integrity/dilemma-game Dilemma Game app]. If using the app, the trainer will guide you through the following steps:
'''Playing the game (app version)'''
#Input the room code provided by the trainer into the app.
#You will be able to see the first dilemma.
#The trainer will share the dilemma on a screen with you (lecture mode in the app)
#Choose one of the four alternative courses of action which best reflects how you would act in the dilemma
#The facilitator will guide you in a discussion about your choices
<br /> +
What might be the short- as well as the long-range consequences? +
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/YU1bz55jSaEvgLnw4Pry4pj8 Performative Culture in Research]
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/gC7DA1ov5dJSedX6PnocZXTJ Cognitive Dissonance and Moral Distress]
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/z5LKn1vp1M5ipLne3UP4y34J Why we justify unethical behaviour]
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/pxDtEnZcfkUDASj8q8K1FwKX To make a virtue of necessity] +
Trainees will start with the online course, consisting of four modules.
The the instruction texts are listed below for each module separately:
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/JtQY5BoRoy7a2YxRW4FrNtrT Introduction to Research Integrity]
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/J9FeNvrxuvBZ6d2uLxDbpQPH Introduction of Virtue Ethics to Research Integrity]
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/AEpLMj1ET7GsHP4tUsg9nutn Virtue Ethics under Current Research Conditions]
[https://public.3.basecamp.com/p/qHZkUih5cAERRB5UUQ2JKezJ Introduction to Responsible Supervision, Mentoring and Role-modeling] +
On this course unit you will focus on the topic of open access and intellectual property. The week is divided in three smaller sections:
<br />
*Video "sour and sweet tastes"
*Short lecture on open access and intellectual property
*Apply your knowledge and start working on the final assignment +
In this learning unit, we will focus on collaboration ''outside'' your research team. This can entail a broad range of actors who are not directly involved in the research itself, but who are involved in broader forms of collaboration in relation to your research, like funding agencies, administrators, publishers, editors, policy makers, companies, and societal stakeholders.
Like collaboration within your research team, collaboration outside the research team can influence RCR. Ideally, you discuss this in conversations with your supervisor/mentor.
Below you will find an overview of the content of this learning unit.
[[File:Unit 3.png|center|frame]] +
This module aims to equip students with the knowledge to comprehend the meaning and importance of research integrity. This will be achieved through a practical hands-on approach, where videos about key aspects of genetic tests, followed by fictional cases, outlining research integrity issues in genetic tests research, will be presented. We aim for students to identify and relate such examples of research misconduct and questionable research practices in genetic tests research, with their own practices when doing school assignments. This will engage students in a group discussion and to critically reflect on the importance of acting with responsibility and honesty in their own school work and life. +
-20principles,-20virtues-20and-20misconduct-20in-20a-20case-20and-20provides-20a-20framework-20to-20consider,-20choose-20and-20defend-20alternative-20courses-20of-20action-20regarding-20realistic-20dilemmas-20in-20research-20integrity.-0A-5B-5BFile:-20DGE.png-7Clink%3Dhttps:-2F-2Fwww.youtube.com-2Fwatch-3Fv%3DQpq-2DoWPdvJQ-26list%3DPLabbUwyulAry4tzZ12eHl5JOJhJGiaE6k-26index%3D6-5D-5D){kind=link}
