Virtues and norms
InstructionsVirtues and norms
You need to have read the instructions before experiencing the exercise.
Moreover, you need to be acquainted with:
a) The concept of virtue and its importance for RI
b) The concept of norm
c) The concept of moral dilemma
e) The content of the ECoC
In order to fruitfully experience this exercise you need to have a background in research (i.e. be employed as researchers) or be a trainer/educator/teacher who has had experience in research in the past.
What is this about?
Why is this important?
Practical Tips
| Handout 1
Form for case reflection Instructions Think about one situation which you have encountered in your professional life in which you found yourself doubting about what was the right thing to do in order to act with integrity. It could be a situation in which you had to face a dilemma and found yourself wondering should I do A or B? Both options might have had undesirable consequences but nevertheless, you had to act and decide what to do. The purpose of this exercise is to invite you to reflect on your personal experience as researcher. Please note that not all the cases will be discussed during the exercise. The facilitator will contact you if your case has been selected for discussion during the exercise. All the cases will be destroyed after the training. Also, if you want you can contact your trainer and ask him to distribute and sign a confidentiality statement. ----- Handout 2 Virtues and norms table Examples of virtues[2]: Resoluteness; Accountability; Availability; Competency; Patience; Perseverance; Reliability; Sincerity; Creativity; Honesty; Objectivity; Humility; Accountability, Punctuality, Trustworthiness/truthfulness, Selflessness; Reflexivity; Clarity of purpose; Collaborative spirit; Fairness; Loyalty; Moderation; Positivity; Respectfulness. Pre filled example table:
Table to be filled by the participant:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Prepare
One week before the exercise takes place you will be asked to submit a RI personal case (this doesn’t need to be a research misconduct case but a case in which, as a researcher, you were in doubt about what was the right thing you should do) (see handout 1 in practical tips). Not all the cases can be discussed during the exercise. If your case is selected the trainer contacts you to prepare a description of the case to be distributed to the rest of the participants.
Protect confidentiality
Prior to the session you will be asked to sign a confidentiality agreement in order to formalize the fact that the information shared during the exercise will be kept confidential and will be destroyed after the training.
Experience the exercise
The trainer will facilitate the exercise by following the steps.
1. Orientation: case and dilemma
Presentation of the case and formulation their dilemma.
2. Replacing and clarification
Participants are given space for clarification questions about the case. This will allow participants to step in the case presenter’s shoes.
3. Virtues and norms
Creation of an overview of virtues and correspnding norms considered relevant in the case at stake (see handout 2 in practical tips).
4. Dialogue about differences and similarities
Engaging in a dialogue about differences and similarities among participants’ virtues and norms. What do you perceive as remarkable?
5. Conclusions
Wrapping up and formulating take home messages.
For a detailed description of the steps see the trainers instructions.What is this about?
Why is this important?
Practical Tips
| You can use the following instruction to help participants reflect on their own cases. These handouts are also included in the instructions for trainees.
Form for case reflection - exercise Virtues and Norms Instructions Think about one situation which you have encountered in your professional life in which you found yourself doubting about what was the right thing to do in order to act with integrity. It could be a situation in which you had to face a dilemma and found yourself wondering should I do A or B? Both options might have had undesirable consequences but nevertheless, you had to act and decide what to do. The purpose of this exercise is to invite you to reflect on your personal experience as researcher. Please note that not all the cases will be discussed during the exercise. The facilitator will contact you if your case has been selected for discussion during the exercise. All the cases will be destroyed after the training. Also, if you want you can contact your trainer and ask him to distribute and sign a confidentiality statement. ----- You might consider printing and distributing a hand-out with a list of RI virtues and the pre-filled table to be used to support participants in step 5 of the exercise. Hand out step five Examples of virtues[4]: Resoluteness; Accountability; Availability; Competency; Patience; Perseverance; Reliability; Sincerity; Creativity; Honesty; Objectivity; Humility; Accountability, Punctuality, Trustworthiness/truthfulness, Selflessness; Reflexivity; Clarity of purpose; Collaborative spirit; Fairness; Loyalty; Moderation; Positivity; Respectfulness. Pre filled example table:
Table to be filled by the participant:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
Preparation
One week before the exercise takes place ask participants to:
1) Submit a RI personal case
2) Read the following theme pages on The Embassy:
a) Virtues in research integrity
b) Moral conflict and moral dilemma
The submitted case does not need to be a research misconduct case but a case in which, as researchers, participants were in doubt about what was the right thing to do.
While asking for cases it is good to manage expectations. Make sure to mention that not all the cases can be discussed during the exercise. However, reflecting on a personal case is important since it brings the focus on participants’ practise as researchers and underlines the fact that moral uncertainty is not something to be ashamed of but it is part of everyone’s experience.
Select a case which might be interesting for participants and ask the case presenter if they would be willing to present the case during the session. Make sure it is a real and personal case and the case owner is able to tell the details of the case. Together you prepare a short description of the case to be distributed to the other participants (this is not mandatory). To help participants reflect on the case you can use a case reflection form (see practical tips).Introduction (5min)
Start the session by welcoming participants and by giving a short introduction to the exercise. Explain the aim of the exercise properly. Please keep in mind that this exercise is not about personal opinions/judgements on what each participant would do in the case, or to justify or condemn what the case-owner did (or did not). Participants should be willing to engage in a dialogue and learn from each other. This should be stressed at the beginning of the session. Also, as a facilitator you should take into account that being a case presenter can be challenging and emotionally burdensome. It is your responsibility to protect the case presenter and call for a time-out in case the conversation becomes too heavy or uncomfortable.
Protect confidentiality (5 min)
At this stage it is important to stress confidentiality. During the session a real-life dilemma will be explored, therefore participants are required to keep the information shared during the session strictly confidential You are strongly recommended to distribute and sign a confidentiality statement in order to formalize the fact that the information you receive, and the ones that will be shred during the exercise should be kept confidential by all participants and by you and will be destroyed after the training.
Orientation: case and dilemma (10 min)
Invite the case presenter to describe the case (previously selected) by focusing on why the case is experienced as morally troublesome. You and the group can help the case presenter to formulate the (two sides of) the dilemma (i.e. should I do A or B?). Yet, the case presenter determines what is the right formulation of their dilemma. In this phase try to focus on two alternative courses of action and avoid exploring third options or creative solutions. This helps to bring focus to the dialogue and encourages people not to start looking for a quick solutions or a way out of the dilemmas. Write down the dilemma and key words describing the case on a flip-chart.
Replacing and clarification (15 min)
In this step you invite participants to put themselves in the case presenter’s shoes and think about which facts in the case need more clarification to gain a better understanding of the situation. All the relevant questions, which enable participants to put themselves in the shoes of the case presenter, should be asked at this point.
Virtues and norms (15-20 min)
Once the case is clear you ask participants to put themselves in the case presenter’s shoes and think about which virtue(s) (two are enough but more are also welcome) would play a role in the specific dilemma, if they were in the case presenter’s situation. You can ask them:
“If you were in the case presenter’s situation and had to decide what to do, which virtue would be important for you in order to make this decision?”
Please note that virtues should not necessarily be linked to one of the options. In this step participants should reflect on which moral character (virtue) they should embody in order to act with integrity in the situation at stake. Contextually, you ask them to reflect about which rule of action (norm) or behaviour follows from the virtue they selected themselves. They can ask themselves
“What should I do in this situation in order to act in accordance with this virtue?” “What rule of action should I follow in order to embody this virtue in this situation?”
Please note that different norms can be related to the same virtue and vice versa.
Before engaging in this step provide participants with a short definition of virtues and norms (please see Values and norms and Virtues in research integrity) If people have question or doubts you can address them at this stage.
Ask participants to fill in a table with the same elements (see below), for example:
| Virtue | Norm/action |
| Justice | I should credit all contributors |
| Courage | I should speak up |
A hand-out with a list of Research Integrity related virtues, a table examples and an empty table can be distributed (see practical tips). Together with the empty table you distribute some post-its.
In the meantime, draw the same table on a flip-chart (or white board) with three columns: perspective, virtue, norm (see below). You can also consider doing this in advance, before the session.
| Name | Virtue | Norm/action |
| Louise | Justice | I should credit all the contributors |
| Courage | I should speak up | |
| Ben | … | ….. |
Dialogue by means of differences and similarities (15 min)
Invite participants to look at the overview and asks the following questions in order to foster reflection:
o What do you perceive as remarkable?
o Are there similarities/differences between different perspectives? Are they in conflict with each other?
o Are these virtues also mentioned or implied in the ECoC? If yes which ones?
o Are we able to select a virtue which is supposed to be the most important in this situation? If so, why is this selected virtue the most important?
o Putting yourselves in the case presenter’s shoes: what do you need (concretely) to act upon the virtue which the group selected? Are there any constraints?
Report people’s answers on the board. You can use different colours, underline words and take short notes.
If you are using this exercise for the first time please use the above questions to facilitate a dialogical reflection. Don’t forget to mention the ECoC. You could even consider bringing a copy of the code with you. Do not take too long for each question. If people start debating or if they go off topic direct them back towards the question at stake.
If people cannot agree on one virtue that is also fine. Report the different conclusions on the table.
TIP:
Don't be afraid of silence. Let people think about the answer. Give them time but not too much, if there are no inputs move on.Conclusions (10 min)
Invite participants to think about the entire process: what is the take home message of this session for them? Try to draw conclusions by asking participants:
o Was it easy or difficult to relate the virtues and norms to each other? How/why so?
o Did putting yourself in the case presenter’s shoes broaden the way you looked at virtues and, consequently norms and behaviors?
o Did the virtues and norms/behaviors identified by others help you to look at virtues differently or more broadly? Do you think that will influence your thinking on ERI dilemmas in practice?Remarks
List of contributors:
Giulia Inguaggiato, Margreet Stolper
For their feedback and contribution, we would like to thank: Signe Mezinska, Armin Schmolmüller, Rea Scepanovic, Tom Lindermann and Daniel Pizzolato, Erika Lofstrom, Solveig Corner.
This training has been developed by the VIRT2UE project, which has received funding form the European Union’s H2020 research programme under grant agreement N 741782.Other information
- ↑ Pennock, R. T. & O’Rourke, M. Developing a Scientific Virtue-Based Approach to Science Ethics Training. Sci. Eng. Ethics 23, 243–262 (2017).
- ↑ From The Europeand Code of conduct, available at http://www.allea.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/ALLEA-European-Code-of-Conduct-for-Research-Integrity-2017-1.pdf and the “Report on the results from the stakeholder focus group” by Ana Marusic et al.
- ↑ Pennock, R. T. & O’Rourke, M. Developing a Scientific Virtue-Based Approach to Science Ethics Training. Sci. Eng. Ethics 23, 243–262 (2017).
- ↑ From The Europeand Code of conduct, available at http://www.allea.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/ALLEA-European-Code-of-Conduct-for-Research-Integrity-2017-1.pdf and the “Report on the results from the stakeholder focus group” by Ana Marusic et al.
