Difference between revisions of "Instruction:6b129846-c455-4849-9eaf-0d25f3c5600e"
From The Embassy of Good Science
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Instruction | {{Instruction | ||
|Title=02 - The Seven Step Method: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity | |Title=02 - The Seven Step Method: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity | ||
| + | |Instruction Goal=Case analysis methods are valuable tools in exploring ethical questions and dilemmas. | ||
|Has Duration=2 | |Has Duration=2 | ||
|Important For=Researchers; Research Ethics Committees; Research Integrity Officers | |Important For=Researchers; Research Ethics Committees; Research Integrity Officers | ||
| Line 10: | Line 11: | ||
{{Instruction Step Trainee | {{Instruction Step Trainee | ||
|Instruction Step Title=1. State problem. | |Instruction Step Title=1. State problem. | ||
| + | |Instruction Step Text=For example, “there’s something about this decision that makes me uncomfortable” or “do I have a conflict of interest?” | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Instruction Step Trainee | {{Instruction Step Trainee | ||
|Instruction Step Title=2. Check facts | |Instruction Step Title=2. Check facts | ||
| + | |Instruction Step Text=Many problems disappear upon closer examination of the situation, while others change radically. | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Instruction Step Trainee | {{Instruction Step Trainee | ||
|Instruction Step Title=3. Identify relevant factors | |Instruction Step Title=3. Identify relevant factors | ||
| + | |Instruction Step Text=For example, persons involved, laws, professional codes, and other practical constraints. | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Instruction Step Trainee | {{Instruction Step Trainee | ||
|Instruction Step Title=4. Develop a list of options | |Instruction Step Title=4. Develop a list of options | ||
| + | |Instruction Step Text=Be imaginative, try to avoid “dilemma”; not “yes” or “no” but whom to go to, what to say. | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Instruction Step Trainee | {{Instruction Step Trainee | ||
|Instruction Step Title=5. Test options | |Instruction Step Title=5. Test options | ||
| + | |Instruction Step Text=1. Employ one or more of the following tests: | ||
| + | |||
| + | · ''Harm test'': does this option do less harm than alternatives? | ||
| + | |||
| + | · ''Publicity test'': would I want my decision published in the newspaper? | ||
| + | |||
| + | · ''Defensibility test'': could I defend my choice before a committee? | ||
| + | |||
| + | · ''Reversibility test'': would I still make my choice if I were adversely affected by it? | ||
| + | |||
| + | · ''Colleague test'': what are my colleagues’ responses to the options? | ||
| + | |||
| + | · ''Professional test'': what might my profession’s governing body or ethics committee say about my choice? | ||
| + | |||
| + | · ''Organization test'': what does the company’s ethics officer or legal counsel say about my choice? | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Instruction Step Trainee | {{Instruction Step Trainee | ||
|Instruction Step Title=6. Make a choice | |Instruction Step Title=6. Make a choice | ||
| + | |Instruction Step Text=All things considered, make a choice. | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Instruction Step Trainee | {{Instruction Step Trainee | ||
|Instruction Step Title=7. Review steps 1–6. | |Instruction Step Title=7. Review steps 1–6. | ||
| + | |Instruction Step Text=· Are there any precautions you can take? | ||
| + | |||
| + | · Is there any way to access more support next time? | ||
| + | |||
| + | · Is there any way to change the organization (for example, suggest policy changes at next departmental meeting)? | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | {{Instruction Remarks Trainee | ||
| + | |Has Remarks=A case analysed by this method is openly available on the Zenodo repository and can be accessed using the following link: <nowiki>https://zenodo.org/deposit/4905906</nowiki> | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | |||
{{Custom TabContent Close Trainee}} | {{Custom TabContent Close Trainee}} | ||
{{Custom TabContent Trainer Open}} | {{Custom TabContent Trainer Open}} | ||
Revision as of 15:48, 8 June 2021
Instructions02 - The Seven Step Method: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity
Instructions for:TraineeTrainer
Goal
Case analysis methods are valuable tools in exploring ethical questions and dilemmas.
Duration (hours)
2
For whom is this important?
Method
1
1. State problem.
For example, “there’s something about this decision that makes me uncomfortable” or “do I have a conflict of interest?”
2
2. Check facts
Many problems disappear upon closer examination of the situation, while others change radically.
3
3. Identify relevant factors
For example, persons involved, laws, professional codes, and other practical constraints.
4
4. Develop a list of options
Be imaginative, try to avoid “dilemma”; not “yes” or “no” but whom to go to, what to say.
5
5. Test options
1. Employ one or more of the following tests:
· Harm test: does this option do less harm than alternatives?
· Publicity test: would I want my decision published in the newspaper?
· Defensibility test: could I defend my choice before a committee?
· Reversibility test: would I still make my choice if I were adversely affected by it?
· Colleague test: what are my colleagues’ responses to the options?
· Professional test: what might my profession’s governing body or ethics committee say about my choice?
· Organization test: what does the company’s ethics officer or legal counsel say about my choice?6
6. Make a choice
All things considered, make a choice.
7
7. Review steps 1–6.
· Are there any precautions you can take?
· Is there any way to access more support next time?
· Is there any way to change the organization (for example, suggest policy changes at next departmental meeting)?Remarks
A case analysed by this method is openly available on the Zenodo repository and can be accessed using the following link: https://zenodo.org/deposit/4905906
Steps
