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
3
Doing research with communities affected by climate change: Climate-conscious methodologies matrix (for researchers and ethics reviewers) +
The climate-conscious methodologies matrix helps researchers, students, and citizen scientists make ethical and responsible decisions in research. It is especially useful when working with climate-related impacts (such as floods, heatwaves, or droughts), with vulnerable or affected communities.
The tool encourages you to '''ask good questions''' throughout all stages of your research (from the early design to communication of results) and helps you adapt your methods while keeping fairness, safety, and community needs at the centre.
In a changing climate, traditional research methods may not work or may cause harm. Communities may be under stress. Researchers may face risks. By using the matrix, you can:
*'''Stay flexible,''' but still do high-quality research
*'''Respect local people and ecosystems'''
*'''Build trust''' through careful planning and honest communication
*'''Support climate justice''' by including affected voices in all stages of research.
In the following steps 5 deks of cards are presented. Each of them addresses the following methodological components:
*Research design
*Assessment and measurement strategies
*Data evaluation and interpretation
*Ethical issues and scientific integrity
*Communication of research findings
Have a look at how to use the cards by clicking on the link below. +
Taxonomies are usually implemented in learning situations. But in some contexts, we may need to evaluate ethical awareness/sensitivity outside the learning context, for example when analysing comments that people have added as open answers to vignettes in retention checks or REI surveys.
We needed to modify the instrument for measuring ethical sensitivity in a non-training context (see Table 2). The instrument can be used in deductive content analysis.
Table 2. Ethical Awareness and Sensitivity Meter (Tammeleht et al., forthcoming).
[[File:Img6.png|center|frameless|500x500px]]
By ethical awareness we mean recognition of ethical aspects, interpreting a situation. In the ethical sensitivity we include awareness, conscious scrutiny of an ethical topic, and recognising intricacies of the issues/participants. +
Theories of normative ethics can be used to analyse participants’ responses to a variety of learning tasks such as analyses of cases or essays, in which participants describe their own approaches to an ethical question or their thinking about ethical matters. If familiarity of ethical approaches or ethical theories are part of the course objectives or intended learning outcomes of the training, an analysis of how the learner has addressed these is very suitable.
For example, the analysis of authentic responses to learning tasks can involve the identification if deontology, virtue, utilitarian ethics, or other approaches, as relevant. The Virt2ue project materials on the Embassy of Good Science [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|Preparatory Viewing: Introduction to Concepts & Themes (embassy.science)]] provides helpful guidance (e.g. a video) into understanding common ethics theories.
The analysis takes a bit of time but may yield interesting information about how learners have understood the concepts. The analysis can focus on the presence of the theoretical concepts in a text, the depth at which the learner uses the theoretical knowledge, or the levels of understanding that the learner displays regarding pertinent ethical theories or approaches. The depth of thinking, which the learner displays, can be analysed with a scheme of levels of reflection or the SOLO taxonomy / ECAG Grid.
[[File:Img11.png|center|frameless|600x600px]]
Figure 3. Example from a case study analysis done by 7 people displaying ethical approaches (visual from MaxQDA programme).
Figure 3 displays ethical approaches displayed in the case analysis and the level of understanding (SOLO taxonomy): the most prevalent in this group is the rule-based approach, but consequentialism is also quite common. SOLO levels indicate that the level of understanding was mostly on the relational and extended abstract level. +
Focusing and attention are important in obtaining new skills and competencies, the same applies to ethics and integrity. Monitoring physiological markers in the context of ethics training has not been researched much. In the context of education there are examples of studying engagement and heart-rate, but eye-tracking is novel.
Eye-tracking/gaze-tracking may have the potential of revealing new insights about how learners process information for moral judgment in learning situations. Gaze-tracking collects a very large number of data points and thus allows within-person comparisons through focusing on events that are similar and frequent. This enables the analysis of how an individual (re)acts across these situations (Kirkpatrick’s level 2). The data can be viewed for example through heat maps.
To facilitate the analysis, visual markers (QR codes) can be used to locate and synchronise the data. The latest SeeTrue eye tracking device model we have used has a software component to recognize code markers. The gaze tracking device will recognize markers as they appear depending on where the person wearing the device is looking at. Thus, with an additional software component developed by researchers at the University of Helsinki, it has been possible to consolidate the gaze points coordinates of various markers into a unified pair of coordinates, allowing tracking the gaze of the person wearing the device on an idealized static version of the scene which contains the areas of interest, in our case posters on ethical principles and ethics theories (Figure 13a).
Eye-tracking data are analysed statistically and displayed often in density plots or heat-maps (Figure 13b). With these plots we can see what the salient areas of interest observed by a subject during a given time interval in the discussion taking place during an episode happen to be. A sensible temporal analysis of the gaze patterns and scan paths is also possible once this representation is available. An initial analysis suggests that the participant whose gaze is visualized in Figure 13b has focused especially on the ethical principle of beneficence and virtue ethics theory. This information can then be considered in light of the case that the participants were discussing, as well as under prior and subsequent arguments presented by the participant. If understanding ethical principles and ethics theory is an intended learning outcome of the training, then, the way in which learners apply the theories and principles can indicate how effectively the training conveys its content. It is noteworthy that the information in the poster boards should correspond with content related to the intended learning outcomes of the training for this method to be used in assessing training effectiveness.
The analysis is time-consuming and would not be used for large-scale measurement of learning. Specific equipment and software are necessary for collecting and analysing the information. If the facilitator has access to these tools, this measurement gives interesting insights about the learning process. Ethical considerations must be considered: while the equipment is easy to remove, it nevertheless attaches to the body (Hannula et al., 2022).
[[File:Img17.png|center|frameless|500x500px]]
Figure 13. a) to the left code recognition (with fisheye distortion correction using our own software) and b) to the right density plot (heat map) of the gaze point locations during a short interval.
The tool may be most suitable for students and early-career researchers as the target group of training and in case of small groups.
From art-science collaborations to technological “fixes” like carbon capture to ancient myths, listen to Sofia Greaves who shares stories of projects at the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre and beyond. +
Please match the key terms related to the Crisis Tree with their descriptions +
<span lang="en-DE">After exploring the image, consider the following guided reflection prompts</span> +
In the previous sessions, we learnt that plastics are not treated the same way. Some can be '''recycled''' and re‑entered into the production cycle, while others can be '''replaced''' with sustainable alternatives. Understanding this distinction is a main step toward reducing waste and making smarter plastics choices in the lab and beyond.
'''Here, you will explore which plastics can be recycled and/or replaced and available alternatives when replacement is the more responsible option.''' +
<span lang="EN-US">Choose the cases you would like to play. The groups can play either the same cases (cases can then be projected on slides) or different ones (cases can be projected by expanding the window below or printed handouts).</span><span lang="EN-US">The cases for handouts can also be found [https://zenodo.org/records/17733497 here].</span>
*Prepare the cases to be shared with the players (print them, put them on slides or other visuals to be used in the activity).
*<span lang="EN-US">Decide whether to hold joint discussions about particular cases across groups or have each group discuss separately.</span>
<div><div><div><span name="_msocom_1"></span></div></div></div> +
Look at slide 8-12 (in step 1) and ask participants to go over the REI leadership principles and take a role of a REI leader.
After having explained what the activity is about you may ask the participants to turn to the posters and work independently. Or you can go over the case analysis as a group following tasks on the slides (both slides and posters include same tasks). The tasks involve: Read the case. The case has a mentor-mentee situation and a dilemma for the leader/supervisor to deal with.
*Identify the ethical principles that may be at stake in this case.
*Use the ethical analysis to solve the situation described in the case.
*Analyse which ethical approaches the possible courses of action follow.
*Reflect back at the REI leadership framework – the group should discuss which REI leadership principles would contribute to solving this case and reflect if they displayed any of the principles. +
<span lang="EN-US">Inspired by the examples shared in the podcast, this task invites you to slow down and imagine a small ritual that embodies care for something within your research environment (e.g., water, soil, lab equipment, participants, data, community).</span>
<span lang="EN-US">Reflect and respond to the prompts below:</span> +
Listen to the podcast from min. 08:07 to 15:35 and answer the questions below. +
<span lang="EN-US">Now that you have identified possible blind spots and challenges in your research, we invite you to use storytelling to craft an original short story. By doing so, you can reflect on hidden assumptions, neglected impacts, silenced voices, and power relations within your own research context or field.</span> <span lang="EN-US">Storytelling helps us see what academic prose often hides.</span> +
<span lang="EN-US">In the two steps above, we have learned about the PEPE framework.</span>
*'''Pluralizing''' invites researchers to <span lang="EN-GB">go beyond the superficial combining of different perspectives that's inattentive to power and to genuinely reflect on the question: how to attend different knowledge forms and navigate that plurality of different perspectives?</span>
*'''Empowering''' <span lang="EN-GB">tries to address the fact that in research we often communicate dry data or facts and publish them, but we don't attend to all of the emotions and perspectives that play a critical role in how we do research and the importance of ''whose'' voice matters.</span>
*'''Politicizing''' <span lang="EN-GB">that attends to the issue of power. We all have very different assumptions about how research might challenge power structures. And that could be more of a scholar activist perspective, but it could also be deeply collaborative.</span>
*'''Embedding''' <span lang="EN-GB">addresses the fact that we're operating in systems that are not necessarily always supportive of what we're doing. H</span><span lang="EN-US">ow do we move beyond temporary experiments to lasting institutional change?</span> +
Fieldwork can have several environmental consequences related to energy use, habitat disturbance, waste production and methods of sampling. Practicing safe, inclusive, and equitable fieldwork can help reduce these risks and costs. In this session, you will learn about various environmental impacts of research fieldwork and explore practical strategies to reduce their impacts.
Watch the video on “Minimising the Environmental Impact of Research Fieldwork” which provides guidelines for mitigating environmental impacts of research fieldwork. +
Take a piece of paper a draw the good researcher. What would characterise a good researcher, scientist, or innovator? What is in their hands, on their mind, in/on their clothes, or their equipment? +
Incorporating gender, health, and climate justice in your research: A reflexive question card exercise +
This activity helps uncover blind spots in conventional research approaches by encouraging reflexivity and intersectional thinking.
The goal is to reflect on one’s own positionality and framing, not to produce right answers, but to surface assumptions and expand accountability.
<span lang="EL"><span lang="EN-US">(Please click on the top left of the image to expand it to full screen and improve your experience).</span></span> +
[[File:Ge2Image3.png|center|frameless|600x600px]]
What do you think are the main ethics issues for this case? Some of the main ones are listed below. Sort each issue into one of the four categories: Autonomy, Future generations;Potential harms and benefits;and Slippery slope. +
The ethical conduct of research is crucial for maintaining the integrity of science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training Responsible Conduct of Research] (RCR) advances scientific goals, fosters a collaborative research environment, and builds public trust in scientific advances that benefit society. Conversely, unethical research practices such as data fabrication and falsification lead to the dissemination of false hypotheses and unreliable data, which harms the search for valid knowledge. Similarly, plagiarism and harassment undermine respect and trust among researchers, while fraudulent or socially irresponsible research weakens public trust and support for science. [https://oir.nih.gov/sourcebook/ethical-conduct/responsible-conduct-research-training The goals of RCR training] include developing a culture of integrity in science and improving knowledge and awareness about the conduct of research.
RCR training and education should be continuous and extend beyond the academic programme throughout a scientist's career. This education can take place in a variety of contexts, such as seminars, workshops, conferences on research ethics and informal mentoring sessions, training courses and laboratory meetings where ethical behaviour and practises are discussed.
As described by van den Hoven and colleagues, multiple factors influence research integrity (RI) training (learning objectives), RI learning (learning outcomes), and changes in RI behaviour (learning outcomes).'"`UNIQ--ref-0000002A-QINU`"' Through these, it is possible to promote trustworthy science, responsible research practices, and high integrity/ethical standards. "Training effects" Can be conceptualised through the (intended) impacts of RI training on various performance levels, including individual, institutional, and societal levels.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000002B-QINU`"' Furthermore, the authors distinguish among intended training effects (for example changes in behaviour);training input and output (that is training focus/content and learners orientating themselves towards this content);outcomes (that is, learners change their behaviour);and training impact (manifestation of the outcome, such as decreases in misconduct).
[https://nap.nationalacademies.org/read/21896/chapter/15 Effective education in research ethics and integrity aims to achieve several crucial goals.]Defining goals for teaching research integrity and research ethics is crucial to promote and foster responsible research practices and a trustworthy research ecosystem. The main goals to achieve in training RE/RI are related to promoting knowledge (in relation to responsible research practices, norms, and guidelines), skills (in relation to ethical decision-making, problem solving and critical thinking), ‘theoretical’ attitude (in relation to what should be done to foster responsible research) and ‘practical’ behaviour (in relation to how researchers behave in their daily practice).'"`UNIQ--ref-0000002C-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-0000002D-QINU`"'
The goal in training students and PhD candidates in RE/RI is to support ever-deepening understanding of ethical principles and practices in research. This includes exploring aspects of honesty, transparency, objectivity and accountability at all stages of the research process, from conception to dissemination of results. The goal is to equip students with the knowledge and skills to conduct research responsibly, avoid misconduct such as plagiarism or falsification, comply with relevant regulations and guidelines, and uphold the integrity of the scientific community.
Although these examples can be used to train students and PhD candidates, they can be used in training more senior profiles to brush up competencies on the topic.
Resources for PhD candidates include (please see the last section of the BEYOND trainer guide for an overview of materials divided by topics and target groups):
*The [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/obas-introduction/ introductory module][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , the modules focusing specific RE and/or RI issues anf the dilemmas] ([https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-with-a-little-help/ With a little help][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-mutual-favours/ Mutual favours][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-sharing-data/ Sharing data][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-so-close/ So close][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-different-results/ Different results][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-put-your-supervisor-first/ Put your supervisor first][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-flexible-scope/ Flexible scope][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ ,] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-outliers/ Outliers][https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ , and] [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/dilemma-invalid-data/ Invalid data]) developed for [https://printeger.eu/upright/toc/ the Upright training] by [https://printeger.eu/ PRINTEGER].
*The e-learning modules on [[Instruction:6ceba4e4-fb32-4953-9138-5436807fcde6|research integrity]], [[Instruction:86f47366-a189-4395-9301-36ddb6d1fc68|virtue ethics relevant for RI]], [[Instruction:43c900ea-a317-4528-8ece-1f3fb3564867|virtue ethics under current research conditions]] and the a series of introductory [[Instruction:17705907-d9b2-4f33-bc4f-088d84b4d971|videos]] produced by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]]. The [[Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c|Modified Dilemma Game]] developed by the [[Guide:Bbe860a3-56a9-45f7-b787-031689729e52|VIRT2UE]] project.
*The introductory videos and information on the teaching methodology and the learning cards ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity learning cards Y]) focusing on doctoral students, alongside a dedicated handbook ([https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Y-Series handbook]) developed by [https://www.path2integrity.eu/ri-materials Path2Integrity Training Programme]
*The RID-SSISS training materials for ECRs and junior academics ([https://www.researchethicstraining.net/ advanced level]).
*The [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge/ BRIDGE project] provides [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/bridge-modules-2/ training modules] and [https://www.academicintegrity.eu/wp/vignettes_interactive/ vignettes] that can be inserted into research ethics and integrity courses.
*The [https://h2020integrity.eu/toolkit/tools-phd-students/ modules and a full interactive training] developed by the [https://h2020integrity.eu/ INTEGRITY] project.
*The scenarios produced by EnTIRE for The Embassy of Good Science ([https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a Research Procedures and Research Integrity];[https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70 Collaborative Working Between Academia and Industry];[https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674 Data Practices, Data Management and FAIR Principles];[https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3 Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity];[https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead Research Environments and Research Integrity];[https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183 Reviewing, Evaluating, Editing and Research Integrity];[https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6 Training, Supervision and Mentoring with Integrity];[https://embassy.science/wiki-wiki/index.php/Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4 Safeguards, Data-sharing and the Disclosure of Sensitive Results]).
Trainers can select one or more of the following tools for evaluating training effectiveness for PhD candidates and early career researchers:
{| class="wikitable"
|+
Table 6: BEYOND Tools for evaluating training effectiveness for early-career researchers
!'''Tool for collecting learning outputs'''
!'''Details'''
!'''Analysis instrument **'''
|-
|'''Self-Reflection Form/Compass'''
|App under development, [https://forms.office.com/Pages/ShareFormPage.aspx?id=WXWumNwQiEKOLkWT5i_j7twYn7PlpvpDlgGDpz2LgIdUMk5XRTVYQTVKRFRDWDlHOUdGU1FHTUlFVi4u&sharetoken=03epmvYBRpmfXvpRg9os form] * (for copying and editing)
|SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
|-
|'''Pre-post texts'''
|Collect a short text (e.g. a response to a case or short essay) before the training and after the training
|SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
|-
|'''Learning diaries'''
|Ask learners keep a diary over a certain period, for each submission provide some guiding questions or topics
|SOLO taxonomy, reflection levels, content criteria
|-
|'''Group reports'''
|Ask groups working together to provide a (short) group report (or provide a template with points to work on)
|SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
|-
|'''Group discussions'''
|Monitor the group discussions to evaluate the level of understanding and content discussed (scaffold as appropriate)
|SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
|-
|'''Group dynamics'''
|''CoTrack'' application: https://www.cotrack.website/en/
|learning analytics
|-
|'''Online learning platform'''
|Make use of accumulated authentic learning outputs in the learning platform.
|statistics, SOLO taxonomy, reflection scale, content criteria
|-
|'''Domain-specific/ domain-transcending measure'''
|Use either of the two forms (WP4.2) measuring recognition and exemplifying of ethical issues.
|statistics, SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
|-
|'''Retention check'''
|After a certain time (few weeks/months) ask learners to provide a short text (analysis of a case, short essay on an ethics topic/question). Compare the levels of understanding to another piece collected during or right after the training.
|SOLO taxonomy, content criteria
|-
|'''Vignettes'''
|This can be used for measuring ethical sensitivity in (non-)training context
|statistics, EASM (based on the SOLO taxonomy), content criteria
|-
|'''National surveys'''
|Can be used for analysing training-related content in reports and monitoring the display of REI leadership.
|statistics, REI leadership framework
|}
For instance, to measure participants’ reactions during or right after the training, Self-Reflection Form can be used. In addition, if learners worked in groups so their group discussions can be monitored, and if they provided a group-report, the learning process can be evaluated based on the SOLO taxonomy to measure the levels of understanding. Moreover, if possible, a couple of months after the training an additional case study could be given to the same learners, and the content of their analysis could again be evaluated with the SOLO taxonomy. With this target group the domain-specific and domain-transcending measure could be implemented. This kind of effectiveness measure would give a possibility to triangulate the measurement in different time points.
Examples for implementation can be found here: [https://helsinkifi.sharepoint.com/:p:/r/sites/BEYONDHelsinkiteam/Shared%20Documents/ENERI%20CR%20material%20example%20for%20ECRs.pptx?d=w10c8dc6f452042fdae8775faf52ca081&csf=1&web=1&e=NAqYpk ENERI CR material example for ECRs.pptx]
'"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000014-QINU`"' The Self-Reflection Form link enables the facilitator to make a copy of the form, which they can then edit, and the data will accumulate on the facilitator’s cloud service (Google or Microsoft).
'"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000015-QINU`"' Analysis instruments are described in WP4.2, later available at the Embassy’s website.
