What is this about? (Is About)
From The Embassy of Good Science
A short summary providing some details about the theme/resource (max. 75 words)
- ⧼SA Foundation Data Type⧽: Text
A
On wrting a second ethnographic work about a village, the researcher went against the wishes of the villagers by not using their real names but acted in accordance with the Principles of Professional Responsibility of the American Anthropological Association. She made exceptions where she judged that using a real name would please the person. +
This fictional case is about an applied medical anthropologist who wrote a series of articles when she was working in an urban black community in the United States. She wrote her articles in an anonymous way so that individuals and/or the community would not be harmed. However, members of the community started a discussion because they were surprised that the name of the community health center and the name of the town were not given. +
Anticipate and Communicate. Ethical Management of Incidental and Secondary Findings in the Clinical, Research, and Direct-to-Consumer Contexts +
These guidelines aim to help researchers in biomedicine and health. They provide recommendations applicable to the ethical management of incidental findings in general and those relevant in specific situations. +
This study addresses one of the approaches in ethics training, focused on the development of ethical decision-making skills. It proposes a new curriculum with focus on day-to-day social and professional practices that have ethical implications for the physical sciences and engineering. The training resulted in researchers' increased ethical decision-making in relation to data management, study conduct, professional and business practices. +
This study aimed to outline research findings from psychology and neuroscience that are important for moral decision making. It also considers how ethics educators can implement these findings in ethics courses. The research findings provide explanations regarding psychologists' ethical decision making. It also offers guidance on how educators can assist future psychologists cope with problems of ethical decision making. +
‘Uzmanlıklarını aktarmak’ ve başkalarını eğitmek için gereken becerileri edinebilmek ve her bir alıştırmanın amaç, içerik ve didaktiğini anlayabilmek için, eğitim alan kişilerin bu alıştırmaları uygulamaları gerekmektedir. Bu nedenle bu eğitimi alan kişilerin, birinci ve ikinci yüz yüze oturumlar arasında, yüz yüze eğitimin ilk kısmında öğrendikleri ve deneyimledikleri 5 alıştırmayı kolaylaştırıcı olarak yönetmeleri gerekmektedir (<u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:36e82c9c-dc83-46cc-a043-df9d93f1801f Öz Beyan Yaklaşımı]</u>; <u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:628b20aa-3ad4-41b8-919b-e45ad17b3d8f Münazara ve Diyalog]</u>; <u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:35961b2d-6734-4bf9-a1d0-5893be9be3a5 Erdemler ve Normlar]</u>, <u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:D1cde436-f9a2-41fa-8706-95ee6389f009 Orta yol]</u> ve İkilem oyunu). +
Eğitim verdiğiniz katılımcılar, birinci ve ikinci yüz yüze oturumlar arasında, yüz yüze eğitimin ilk kısmında öğrendikleri ve deneyimledikleri 5 alıştırmayı kolaylaştırıcı olarak yöneteceklerdir (<u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:36e82c9c-dc83-46cc-a043-df9d93f1801f Öz Beyan Yaklaşımı]</u>; <u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:628b20aa-3ad4-41b8-919b-e45ad17b3d8f Münazara ve Diyalog]</u>; <u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:35961b2d-6734-4bf9-a1d0-5893be9be3a5 Erdemler ve Normlar]</u>, <u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:D1cde436-f9a2-41fa-8706-95ee6389f009 Orta yol]</u> ve <u>İkilem oyunu</u>). Katılımcıların bu deneyimleri hakkında bilgi sahibi olmak ve son yüz yüze grup oturumunu hazırlamak için eğitmenlerin katılımcılardan <u>[https://www.dropbox.com/s/1fmppqv189jxlqj/Self%20reflection%20form.pdf?dl=0 özdüşünüm formlarını]</u> toplamaları ve analiz etmeleri gerekmektedir. Bu formlar, eğitimin son oturumunda hangi konuların üzerinde durulması ve hangi alıştırmalar için daha fazla pratik yapılması gerektiğini belirlemede eğitmenlere yardımcı olacaktır. +
Bu interaktif modülü alarak aşağıdaki konular hakkında bilgi sahibi olacaksınız:
*[https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/hi/h2020-ethics_code-of-conduct_en.pdf Araştırmalarda Dürüstlük Konusunda Avrupa Davranış Kodu (ECoC)]: Kodun içeriğini öğrenirken aynı zamanda kodda tanımlanan iyi uygulamalar ve ihlaller üzerine de fikir yürütecek ve yorumlamalarda bulunacaksınız.
*'''Sorumlu araştırma davranışı, kusurlu araştırma davranışı ve tartışmaya açık araştırma uygulamaları:''' sorumlu uygulamalar, kusurlu davranışlar ve gri alanlar arasındaki farklılıkları öğrenecek ve bunların ECoC içerisinde nasıl ele alındığına dair yorumlamalarda bulunacaksınız.
*'''Araştırma davranışını etkileyen çeşitli faktörler: '''Araştırmacı olarak kendi sorumluluklarınız üzerine ve 1) bireysel araştırmacılar, 2) araştırma kültürü ve 3) araştırma sistemi düzeyinde iyi araştırma davranışlarının ihlal edilmesine yol açan muhtemel sebeplere dair fikir yürütecek ve yorumlamalarda bulunacaksınız. +
In this study authors used statistical methods to compare data from two clinical trials - one with concerns of research misconduct and other with no such concerns. The results showed that data from the suspected clinical trial were fabricated. +
This is a factual case.<br />
'"`UNIQ--references-00000000-QINU`"' +
This article provides a review of education materials in responsible conduct of research in biomedical and life sciences. Authors split their findings in several categories: data acquisition, management, sharing and ownership; mentor and trainee relationship; publication practices and responsible authorship; peer review; collaborative science; research on humans; research on laboratory animals; research misconduct; and conflict of interest. Authors hope this review will help raise awareness for responsible conduct of research among biomedical and life scientists. +
Professor Dale Goodman is asked by a non-academic journal to review a book about prostitution, which lies within the scope of expertise, even if the book is not academic. He tries to write an honest assessment of the book's merits and submits it to the journal, which changes the review's title upon publication without informing Goodman. The researcher believes that the new title, "Prison Babes" is harmful and misrepresents the book, the review and the discussed phenomenon. The case asks about the appropriate course of action in such situations. +
The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia has various codes and policies on responsible research. The page contains an overview of the following codes and guidelines:
* The Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research
* The National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research
* The Australian Code for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes
* The NHMRC Research Integrity and Misconduct Policy
* Factsheets on reporting research misconduct
* Information on the Australian Research Integrity Committee +
Australian Guide to Managing and Investigating Potential Breaches of the Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research +
This guideline specifies the official procedures of investigating research misconduct (RM) in Australia. RM breaches, as defined in the guideline, occur on a spectrum, with RM being serious or repeated breaches of the Australian Code. +
The policy outlines requirements for institutions, and individuals engaged in Australian Research Council (ARC) business, to report to the ARC research integrity matters, and the action the ARC may take in response to reported breaches of the Code. It also describes how the ARC can refer concerns or complaints to research institutions, who, in accordance with the Code, are responsible for managing and investigating potential breaches of the Code. +
The Austrian Agency for Research Integrity (Osterreichische Agentur fur Wissenschaftliche Integritat - OeAWI) works to raise awareness of the standards of good scientific practice among scientists and researchers as well as the general public. It also contributes to ensuring that violations of the standards of good scientific practice are identified and remedied. The organisation works to strengthen the ethos of science and research, and advocates adherence to the code of conduct derived from that ethos. Its activities focus on investigating and preventing misconduct in research and scholarship, not on imposing sanctions for misconduct. Given that violations of the standards of good scientific practice are not necessarily also violations of applicable law, the OeAWI performs its duties as a complement to – but not in competition with – the legal system. Legislation relevant to science and research, the principles of research ethics and the standards of good scientific practice all contribute equally to ensuring a high degree of integrity in research and scholarship. +
This case described how the limited space in journals is not aligned with the increase in submissions. Due to publication pressure authors sometimes cut corners, which can lead to cases of misconduct.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000004E-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-0000004F-QINU`"' +
We received a letter from a third party, accusing author A of putting his/her name against an article, published in our journal, when the research itself belongs to author A's student.
Our journal is a fully English language publication and the accusing third party and author A are from a non-English speaking country, as is the student (assumedly). The accusing third party forwarded the student's research paper to the editor which is entirely written in another language but contained an English abstract.
The Editor contacted author A and the response received included an attached confirmation letter supposedly from his/her student stating that they had no involvement in the published work by author A and that their research is completely separate to the published paper by author A.
We have several concerns:
1. It is difficult for the editor to examine the abstract the third party sent to us against the published article by author A.
2. We do not know if the response letter emailed from author A, confirming no involvement in author A's paper, is genuinely from the student.
3. The accuser's identity or relation to the matter is unknown to us. Ideally the editor needs to contact the student directly but we need bona fide contact details of the student and we are not sure we would get it from the accuser or the accused author A. Google is also of little help as there are so many people with the name. +
Researchers everywhere are under increasing pressure to publish in high quality journals. The amount of space available in a journal such as ''Medical Education'' has not kept pace with the rise in submissions. Against a background of fierce competition, authors sometimes cut corners. This may lead to misconduct. This paper aims to explore the most common types of publication misconduct seen in the ''Medical Education'' editorial office, and to consider the reasons for this and the implications for researchers in the field. +
Authors couldn’t find a patient to give consent for case report. Then the patient found the report. +
This short text informs about a case of a 35-year-old woman with a mysterious mass that took 11 years to be diagnosed. Since the authors could not reach the patient to obtain her consent for publication, they removed any identifiable information and published the paper anyway. The patient eventually read the paper, recognized herself and asked for retraction. +
