Value Analysis: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity
From The Embassy of Good Science
Revision as of 16:09, 14 May 2021 by 0000-0002-2385-985X (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Instruction |Title=Value Analysis: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity |Instruction Goal=Members of The Embassy of Good Science have devel...")
InstructionsValue Analysis: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity
Instructions for:TraineeTrainer
Goal
Members of The Embassy of Good Science have developed a set of six user-friendly, accessible methods for analysing research ethics and research integrity cases.
These methods have been identified, adapted and presented so that they can be appropriated by all users, without prior philosophical knowledge, in local contexts.Requirements
The key aim for the case analysis method described here is that it can be appropriated by all users, without prior philosophical knowledge, in local contexts.
In order to apply this method in the analysis of specific cases, it is advised that RECs, RIOs and IRBs engage with the regulatory frameworks and normative standards that apply to their respective organizations in the form of codes of ethics, codes of conduct, funding body standards and, if applicable, broader national and international research ethics and research integrity regulatory documents.Duration (hours)
2
For whom is this important?
Method
Steps
What is this about?
This case analysis uses a procedure advanced by Jack R. Fraenkel (1976) for the purpose of values education. Fraenkel (1932-2013) earned a PhD from Stanford University in 1966 and subsequently worked at San Francisco State University for more than 30 years. When he retired, he was Professor of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education.
Why is this important?
Fraenkel published a lot on research methodology, curriculum development and research in education (Obituary, 2014). Guided by the work of Coombs and Meux (1971), Fraenkel (1976) advanced an interesting method to analyse value conflicts meant for teachers “[…] to help students determine for themselves what individuals caught in value dilemmas should do […]” (Fraenkel, 1976, 202).
1
1. What is the incident about?
What is the dilemma?
2
2. What might (the central character) do to try and resolve the dilemma?
What alternatives exist?
3
3. What might happen if he or she does each of these things?
What might be the consequences of the various alternatives?
4
4. What might happen to those who are not immediately involved?
What might be the short- as well as the long-range consequences?
5
5. What evidence, if any, is there that these consequences would indeed occur?
What could be considered as forseeable consequences?
6
6. Would each consequence be good or bad? Why?
Is there a positive balance between good and bad consequences?
7
7. What do you think X should do?
What do you think is the best thing for X to do?
Remarks
Steps
