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
M
This is a factual case. This editorial article offers a short historic overview of scientific misconduct and outlines its various forms. Several recommendations are added to prevent the occurrence of these various forms of (unintentional) scientific misconduct. Importantly, the article stresses that research integrity is not merely concerns the research ethics boards but is important for all those involved in the scientific community.'"`UNIQ--references-00000000-QINU`"'
<br />
'"`UNIQ--references-00000001-QINU`"' +
This module will give an overview of measurement tools and evaluate the possible use of the identified measurement methods for long-term effects.
We have divided the tools according to Kirkpatrick’s framework (1959) for training effectiveness. The framework has been used for training evaluation in REI context (Steele et al., 2016;Stoesz & Yudintseva, 2018) as well as HE context (Praslova, 2010), and includes the following levels (different kinds of tools may provide information about the achievement of the level):
# reactions (participants’ self-assessment) – different kinds of instrument may be used to collect learners’ affective and utility judgements
# learning process (knowledge, content) – content tests, performance tasks, other course-work that is graded/evaluated, pre-post texts (tests)
# behaviour and practices (acting in the research community) – end-of-programme/course integration paper/project, learning diaries/journals (kept over a longer period), documentation of integrative work, tasks completed as part of other courses
# results (e.g. institutional outcomes) – results can be monitored via alumni and employer surveys, media coverage, awards or recognition. In addition, nation-wide surveys may indicate the ‘health’ of RE/RI.
In this module we will look at tools that would provide information about trainings’ long-term effect, we will outline their feasibility and scale. All the presented tools would be usable with different target groups (e.g. students and supervisors) in HE context and are not discipline specific (unless otherwise specified). +
This module will give an overview of measurement tools and evaluate the possible use of the identified measurement methods for mid-term effects.
We have divided the tools according to Kirkpatrick’s framework (1959) for training effectiveness. The framework has been used for training evaluation in REI context (Steele et al., 2016;Stoesz & Yudintseva, 2018) as well as HE context (Praslova, 2010), and includes the following levels (different kinds of tools may provide information about the achievement of the level):
#reactions (participants’ self-assessment) – different kinds of instrument may be used to collect learners’ affective and utility judgements,
#learning process (knowledge, content) – content tests, performance tasks, other course-work that is graded/evaluated, pre-post texts (tests),
#behaviour and practices (acting in the research community) – end-of-programme/course integration paper/project, learning diaries/journals (kept over a longer period), documentation of integrative work, tasks completed as part of other courses,
#results (e.g. institutional outcomes) – results can be monitored via alumni and employer surveys, media coverage, awards or recognition. In addition, nation-wide surveys may indicate the ‘health’ of RE/RI.
In this module we will look at tools that would provide information about trainings’ mid-term effect, we will outline their feasibility and scale. All the presented tools would be usable with different target groups (e.g. students and supervisors) in HE context and are not discipline specific (unless otherwise specified). +
This module will give an overview of measurement tools and evaluate the possible use of the identified measurement methods for short term effects.
We have divided the tools according to Kirkpatrick’s framework (1959) for training effectiveness. The framework has been used for training evaluation in REI context (Steele et al., 2016;Stoesz & Yudintseva, 2018) as well as HE context (Praslova, 2010), and includes the following levels (different kinds of tools may provide information about the achievement of the level):
# reactions (participants’ self-assessment) – different kinds of instrument may be used to collect learners’ affective and utility judgements
# learning process (knowledge, content) – content tests, performance tasks, other course-work that is graded/evaluated, pre-post texts (tests)
# behaviour and practices (acting in the research community) – end-of-programme/course integration paper/project, learning diaries/journals (kept over a longer period), documentation of integrative work, tasks completed as part of other courses
# results (e.g. institutional outcomes) – results can be monitored via alumni and employer surveys, media coverage, awards or recognition. In addition, nation-wide surveys may indicate the ‘health’ of RE/RI.
In this module we will look at tools that would provide information about trainings’ short-, term effect, we will outline their feasibility and scale. All the presented tools would be usable with different target groups (e.g. students and supervisors) in HE context and are not discipline specific (unless otherwise specified). +
MedTech Europe is a trade association for medical technology manufacturers in Europe. To promote the growth of the medical technology industry and to fulfill the increasing healthcare needs, MedCom Europe complies with several laws, regulations, and ethical standards. Besides, in this Code of Ethical Business Practice, standards are provided to guide its members in the different types of activities they are involved in, such as interacting with health care professionals, providing demonstration products and samples, dealing with royalties, conducting research, etc. +
In this non-randomized intervention study, authors explored whether formal instruction on International Committee of Medical Journal editors (ICMJE) authorship criteria influences medical students' perceptions of authorship dilemmas. They also explored whether they perceive authorship as a conventional or moral concept. +
This is a series of video vignettes and discussion guidebook intended to tackle issues related to mentoring international post docs. The aim is to provoke discussion, facilitate problem-solving and identify alternate courses of action. +
Mentoring for Responsible Research: The Creation of a Curriculum for Faculty to Teach RCR in the Research Environment +
This study is about a workshop curriculum with aim of providing research faculty with concrete and specific tools to effectively introduce research ethics in research environment. The authors suggest that the best way to teach students about ethics in research is in the places where research is conducted, for example in the lab, the field or the clinic. +
A mentor has a research student for his research group. Over the course of the semester, the student becomes seriously ill with a chronic disease. As a result, the student regularly misses experiments and falls behind on the research.
The mentor is in doubt what to do. He wants to be supportive of the student, but also has an obligation to the research sponsor.
In addition, the student is foreign and will lose his right to stay in the country if he loses his affiliation with the university. +
A student enters graduate school with two years of funding. She easily finds a faculty member to work with. After the two years, the faculty member refuses to be the student's supervisor +
A second-year graduate student repeatedly fails the qualifier. What should she do? +
A graduate student is working under the supervision of a professor. However, the professor does not provide the student with a problem, nor seems interested in the work the student is doing alone. +
A graduate student from a minority background is studying at a good university. She struggles however due to insufficient intensive courses at her undergraduate university. Her grades are not great.
A faculty member asks the sutdent to participate in meeting aimed at recruiting minority students for the university's graduate program.
The student is in doubt, because on the one hand she feels flattered, but on the other hand she is afraid that her coursework will suffer. +
An assistant professor agreed to take on a student as thesis advisor. Over the course of the year it becomes clear to the assistant professor that the supervision takes more time than she expected. In addition, the student does not seem to be at the level that the assistant professor had hoped. The student also appears to make little progressin her level. The assistant professor regularly fails to read all materials for the meetings with the student.
Then, a faculty colleague leaves the faculty and the assistant professor is pressured to take over one of his students.
It becomes more and more clear that she cannot attend to both students. She wants to let the first student go. +
Mertonian norms are the four norms of good scientific research first introduced by the American sociologist, Robert K. Merton. These norms are communism, universalism, disinterestedness, and organized skepticism. '"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-00000001-QINU`"' +
Meta-Analysis Map: relevant factors shaping public attitudes of science communication - policy brief +
The ''Meta-analysis Map'' report reviews and synthesises existing academic research to identify factors that influence how the public perceives and responds to science communication. It maps key determinants shaping attitudes toward scientific information, organising them into four main categories: (1) audience characteristics (e.g., psychological biases, prior knowledge, values), (2) communicator traits (e.g., trust, background, goals), (3) message features (e.g., content credibility, clarity), and (4) communication channels and media environments (e.g., social media effects). The report also examines how misinformation and conspiracy beliefs affect individuals’ interpretations of scientific communication, offering a conceptual foundation for later empirical work in the TRESCA project. It aims to support improved strategies for effective, trustworthy science communication by highlighting psychological and media-related processes that help or hinder public understanding and trust. +
This study examined the issue of biases in research that is considered to be the cause of reproducibility crisis. The results showed that extent of biases varied across fields and was relatively small. The authors did not find enough evidence that would indicate that biases were related to research productivity. They suggested that potential risk factors for producing unreliable results could be early-career status of a researcher, isolation, and lack of research integrity. +
The SIENNA D5.3 report outlines '''methods to promote ethical practices in the research, development, and application of human enhancement technologies (HET)'''. It focuses on creating practical tools and frameworks that help stakeholders integrate ethical reflection into both early and later stages of technology development. The core contributions include '''ethical guidelines''' tailored to human enhancement, a proposed '''research ethics framework''' that shapes how studies involving HETs are conducted, and a recommended '''international expert body''' to oversee ethical, social, and regulatory concerns. The report also argues for reconsidering how human enhancement is positioned within medical, legal, and societal contexts. It highlights dissemination strategies to ensure that these methods remain influential beyond the SIENNA project’s lifetime, supporting lasting ethical awareness among policymakers, technologists, and researchers. +
Bu modülde aşağıdaki konuları öğrenecek ve bu konular üzerine yorumlamalarda bulunacaksınız:
*'''Araştırma ile ilgili bir bağlamda yaşadığınız bir bilişsel çelişki deneyimi: '''Bilişsel çelişkinin dinamiklerini ve araştırma süreci ile olan ilişkisini fark etmeniz konusunda size yol gösterilecektir.
*'''Kendini haklı çıkarma stratejilerinin gerekliliği ve riskleri: '''Kullanma ihtimalinizin bulunduğu kendini haklı çıkarma stratejileri ve bu stratejilerin yol açabileceği olası istenmeyen sonuçlar – bilişsel önyargıların ortaya çıkması gibi – üzerine fikir yürütmeniz ve yorumlamalarda bulunmanız istenecektir.
*'''Araştırma doğruluğu konusunda kendi disiplininizle en ilgili olduğunu düşündüğünüz ihlaller ve muhtemel kendini haklı çıkarma stratejileri: '''Kendi disiplininizle en ilgili olduğunu düşündüğünüz araştırma doğruluğu ihlalini belirledikten sonra sizden, farklı kendini haklı çıkarma stratejileri yazmanız istenecektir. +
This is a factual case in which a psychologist who is found guilty of scientific misconduct. However, it is unclear whether the mistakes in the investigated publications are deliberately and thus a result of data fabrication or whether they are unintentional. This causes some to question whether the decision to declare the psychologist guilty is the right one, while others agree with the ruling.
'"`UNIQ--references-00000000-QINU`"' +
