Ethical standards in research
Bylawsgovernance gic planplanning n and scientific & racial ational & t & early career sity-based child and family policy l standards in to other out usethical standards in d by the srcd governing council, march principles listed below were published in the 1990-91 directory, except for principles 15 and 16, first published in the fall 1991 ple 1. Non-harmful procedures: the investigator should use no research procedure that may harm the child either physically or psychologically. The investigator is also obligated at all times to use the least stressful research procedure whenever possible. When the investigator is in doubt about the possible harmful effects of the research procedures, consultation should be sought from others. When harm seems inevitable, the investigator is obligated to find other means of obtaining the information or to abandon the research. Instances may, nevertheless, rise in which exposing the child to stressful conditions may be necessary if diagnostic or therapeutic benefits to the child are associated with the research. Informed consent: before seeking consent or assent from the child, the investigator should inform the child of all features of the research that may affect his or her willingness to participate and should answer the child's questions in terms appropriate to the child's comprehension. The investigator should respect the child's freedom to choose to participate in the research or not by giving the child the opportunity to give or not give assent to participation as well as to choose to discontinue participation at any time. Assent means that the child shows some form of agreement to participate without necessarily comprehending the full significance of the research necessary to give informed consent. Investigators working with infants should take special effort to explain the research procedures to the parents and be especially sensitive to any indicators of discomfort in the infant. In spite of the paramount importance of obtaining consent, instances can arise in which consent or any kind of contact with the participant would make the research impossible to carry out. Conceivably, such research can be carried out ethically if it is conducted in public places, participants' anonymity is totally protected, and there are no foreseeable negative consequences to the participant. However, judgments on whether such research is ethical in particular circumstances should be made in consultation with an institutional review ple 3.
Ethical standards in research studies
Informed consent requires that parents or other responsible adults be informed of all the features of the research that may affect their willingness to allow the child to participate. As with the child and parents or guardians informed consent requires that the persons interacting with the child during the study be informed of all features of the research which may affect their willingness to participate. Incentives: incentives to participate in a research project must be fair and must not unduly exceed the range of incentives that the child normally experiences. Deception: although full disclosure of information during the procedure of obtaining consent is the ethical ideal, a particular study may necessitate withholding certain information or deception. Whenever withholding information or deception is judged to be essential to the conduct of the study, the investigator should satisfy research colleagues that such judgment is correct. If withholding information or deception is practiced, and there is reason to believe that the research participants will be negatively affected by it, adequate measures should be taken after the study to ensure the participant's understanding of the reasons for the deception. Investigators whose research is dependent upon deception should make an effort to employ deception methods that have no known negative effects on the child or the child's ple 7. In complying with requirements for data sharing, researchers need to carefully consider whether they have provided data which, if combined, risks violating participant ple 8. Mutual responsibilities: from the beginning of each research investigation, there should be clear agreement between the investigator and the parents, guardians or those who act in loco parentis, and the child, when appropriate, that defines the responsibilities of each. The investigator has the obligation to honor all promises and commitments of the ple 9: jeopardy: when, in the course of research, information comes to the investigator's attention that may jeopardize the child's well-being, the investigator has a responsibility to discuss the information with the parents or guardians and with those expert in the field in order that they may arrange the necessary assistance for the child. Researchers need to be aware that they may obtain findings suggesting that a child's health and well-being might be in jeopardy, that these findings may include false positives, and they should be knowledgeable about current human subjects procedures and regulations for informing families of incidental ple 10. Unforeseen consequences: when research procedures result in undesirable consequences for the participant that were previously unforeseen, the investigator should immediately employ appropriate measures to correct these consequences, and should redesign the procedures if they are to be included in subsequent ple 11. Informing participants: immediately after the data are collected, the investigator should clarify for the research participant any misconceptions that may have arisen.
Ethics in research studies
Implications of findings: investigators should be mindful of the social, political and human implications of their research and should be especially careful in the presentation of findings from the research. This principle, however, in no way denies investigators the right to pursue any area of research or the right to observe proper standards of scientific ple 15. Scientific misconduct: misconduct is defined as the fabrication or falsification of data, plagiarism, misrepresentation, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing, conducting, analyzing, or reporting research. The society shall provide vigorous leadership in the pursuit of scientific investigation that is based on the integrity of the investigator and the honesty of research and will not tolerate the presence of scientific misconduct among its members. It shall be the responsibility of the voting members of governing council to reach a decision about the possible expulsion of members found guilty of personal ance & bylawsgovernance gic planplanning n and scientific & racial ational & t & early career sity-based child and family policy l standards in to other line button, which as you can see has several shipnaeyc g a booksubmitting a g the ing ng young of practitionersabout is teacher research? Authors and photographerswriting for young g for teaching young g for voices of g for the naeyc ntly asked raph submission sions, reprints, and ited program itation of early learning education ences & 's professional learning 's annual of the young -to-face sional developmentabout professional logy-based -to-face itation centerjob childhood workforce systems r cal assistance policy se of state sional development your advocacy en's champions l anti-bias to schoolback to school: professional with disasters and position books and ng diverse g challenging behavior/ learningfor sion and logy and young childrenwith infants & preschoolers & school-age se to > ethical standards for l standards for l standards are critically important when conducting research with young children and other vulnerable populations. Some key points are:Research procedures must never harm children, physically or en and their families have the right to full information about the research in which they may participate, including possible risks and benefits. Those who receive federal funds for research must use specific informed consent procedures with research en’s questions about the research should be answered in ways children can en and their families have the right to refuse to participate in research or to withdraw from participating at any ation obtained through research with children should remain confidential. Researchers should not disclose personal information or the identity of participants in written or oral reports and r understanding of ethical issues in research may be found in the following resources:Naeyc’s code of ethical conduct and statement of commitment presents general ethical principles, although it does not specifically discuss research with national institutes of health (nih) provides guidance on ethical research practices for children (the nih definition of "children" extends to age 21). Information is available at the office of extramural research (oer) web site at /grants/policy/hs/ society for research in child development (srcd) has developed ethical standards for research with ethical standards of the american educational research association (aera) include guidelines for research with children. Go back to using ec the browser controls to adjust the font size, or print this is ethics in research & why is it important? This is the most common way of defining "ethics": norms for conduct that distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable people learn ethical norms at home, at school, in church, or in other social settings. Ethical norms are so ubiquitous that one might be tempted to regard them as simple commonsense.
On the other hand, if morality were nothing more than commonsense, then why are there so many ethical disputes and issues in our society? Plausible explanation of these disagreements is that all people recognize some common ethical norms but interpret, apply, and balance them in different ways in light of their own values and life experiences. For example, two people could agree that murder is wrong but disagree about the morality of abortion because they have different understandings of what it means to be a human societies also have legal rules that govern behavior, but ethical norms tend to be broader and more informal than laws. Although most societies use laws to enforce widely accepted moral standards and ethical and legal rules use similar concepts, ethics and law are not the same. We can also use ethical concepts and principles to criticize, evaluate, propose, or interpret laws. Peaceful civil disobedience is an ethical way of protesting laws or expressing political r way of defining 'ethics' focuses on the disciplines that study standards of conduct, such as philosophy, theology, law, psychology, or sociology. For instance, in considering a complex issue like global warming, one may take an economic, ecological, political, or ethical perspective on the problem. While an economist might examine the cost and benefits of various policies related to global warming, an environmental ethicist could examine the ethical values and principles at different disciplines, institutions, and professions have standards for behavior that suit their particular aims and goals. These standards also help members of the discipline to coordinate their actions or activities and to establish the public's trust of the discipline. Ethical norms also serve the aims or goals of research and apply to people who conduct scientific research or other scholarly or creative activities. See glossary of commonly used terms in research are several reasons why it is important to adhere to ethical norms in research. First, norms promote the aims of research, such as knowledge, truth, and avoidance of error. For example, prohibitions against fabricating, falsifying, or misrepresenting research data promote the truth and minimize , since research often involves a great deal of cooperation and coordination among many different people in different disciplines and institutions, ethical standards promote the values that are essential to collaborative work, such as trust, accountability, mutual respect, and fairness.
For example, many ethical norms in research, such as guidelines for authorship, copyright and patenting policies, data sharing policies, and confidentiality rules in peer review, are designed to protect intellectual property interests while encouraging collaboration. Most researchers want to receive credit for their contributions and do not want to have their ideas stolen or disclosed , many of the ethical norms help to ensure that researchers can be held accountable to the public. For instance, federal policies on research misconduct, conflicts of interest, the human subjects protections, and animal care and use are necessary in order to make sure that researchers who are funded by public money can be held accountable to the , ethical norms in research also help to build public support for research. People are more likely to fund a research project if they can trust the quality and integrity of y, many of the norms of research promote a variety of other important moral and social values, such as social responsibility, human rights, animal welfare, compliance with the law, and public health and safety. Ethical lapses in research can significantly harm human and animal subjects, students, and the public. For example, a researcher who fabricates data in a clinical trial may harm or even kill patients, and a researcher who fails to abide by regulations and guidelines relating to radiation or biological safety may jeopardize his health and safety or the health and safety of staff and and policies for research the importance of ethics for the conduct of research, it should come as no surprise that many different professional associations, government agencies, and universities have adopted specific codes, rules, and policies relating to research ethics. Many government agencies, such as the national institutes of health (nih), the national science foundation (nsf), the food and drug administration (fda), the environmental protection agency (epa), and the us department of agriculture (usda) have ethics rules for funded researchers. Other influential research ethics policies include singapore statement on research integrity, the american chemical society, the chemist professional’s code of conduct, code of ethics (american society for clinical laboratory science) american psychological association, ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct, statements on ethics and professional responsibility (american anthropological association), statement on professional ethics (american association of university professors), the nuremberg code and the world medical association's declaration of following is a rough and general summary of some ethical principals that various codes address*:Strive for honesty in all scientific communications. Do not deceive colleagues, research sponsors, or the to avoid bias in experimental design, data analysis, data interpretation, peer review, personnel decisions, grant writing, expert testimony, and other aspects of research where objectivity is expected or required. Keep good records of research activities, such as data collection, research design, and correspondence with agencies or data, results, ideas, tools, resources. Never t confidential communications, such as papers or grants submitted for publication, personnel records, trade or military secrets, and patient sible h in order to advance research and scholarship, not to advance just your own career. Promote their welfare and allow them to make their own t for t your colleagues and treat them to promote social good and prevent or mitigate social harms through research, public education, and discrimination against colleagues or students on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity, or other factors not related to scientific competence and in and improve your own professional competence and expertise through lifelong education and learning; take steps to promote competence in science as a and obey relevant laws and institutional and governmental proper respect and care for animals when using them in research. Do not conduct unnecessary or poorly designed animal subjects conducting research on human subjects, minimize harms and risks and maximize benefits; respect human dignity, privacy, and autonomy; take special precautions with vulnerable populations; and strive to distribute the benefits and burdens of research fairly.
It is therefore important for researchers to learn how to interpret, assess, and apply various research rules and how to make decisions and to act ethically in various situations. For example, consider the following case,The research protocol for a study of a drug on hypertension requires the administration of the drug at different doses to 50 laboratory mice, with chemical and behavioral tests to determine toxic effects. He therefore decides to extrapolate from the 45 completed results to produce the 5 additional different research ethics policies would hold that tom has acted unethically by fabricating data. If this study were sponsored by a federal agency, such as the nih, his actions would constitute a form of research misconduct, which the government defines as "fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism" (or ffp). It is important to remember, however, that misconduct occurs only when researchers intend to deceive: honest errors related to sloppiness, poor record keeping, miscalculations, bias, self-deception, and even negligence do not constitute misconduct. The error does not affect the overall results of his research, but it is potentially misleading. Failing to publish a correction would be unethical because it would violate norms relating to honesty and objectivity in are many other activities that the government does not define as "misconduct" but which are still regarded by most researchers as unethical. These are sometimes referred to as "other deviations" from acceptable research practices and include:Publishing the same paper in two different journals without telling the ting the same paper to different journals without telling the informing a collaborator of your intent to file a patent in order to make sure that you are the sole ing a colleague as an author on a paper in return for a favor even though the colleague did not make a serious contribution to the sing with your colleagues confidential data from a paper that you are reviewing for a data, ideas, or methods you learn about while reviewing a grant or a papers without ng outliers from a data set without discussing your reasons in an inappropriate statistical technique in order to enhance the significance of your ing the peer review process and announcing your results through a press conference without giving peers adequate information to review your ting a review of the literature that fails to acknowledge the contributions of other people in the field or relevant prior hing the truth on a grant application in order to convince reviewers that your project will make a significant contribution to the hing the truth on a job application or curriculum the same research project to two graduate students in order to see who can do it the rking, neglecting, or exploiting graduate or post-doctoral g to keep good research g to maintain research data for a reasonable period of derogatory comments and personal attacks in your review of author's ing a student a better grade for sexual a racist epithet in the significant deviations from the research protocol approved by your institution's animal care and use committee or institutional review board for human subjects research without telling the committee or the reporting an adverse event in a human research g animals in ng students and staff to biological risks in violation of your institution's biosafety ging someone's ng supplies, books, or g an experiment so you know how it will turn unauthorized copies of data, papers, or computer over $10,000 in stock in a company that sponsors your research and not disclosing this financial rately overestimating the clinical significance of a new drug in order to obtain economic actions would be regarded as unethical by most scientists and some might even be illegal in some cases. However, they do not fall into the narrow category of actions that the government classifies as research misconduct. Indeed, there has been considerable debate about the definition of "research misconduct" and many researchers and policy makers are not satisfied with the government's narrow definition that focuses on ffp. However, given the huge list of potential offenses that might fall into the category "other serious deviations," and the practical problems with defining and policing these other deviations, it is understandable why government officials have chosen to limit their y, situations frequently arise in research in which different people disagree about the proper course of action and there is no broad consensus about what should be done. In these situations, there may be good arguments on both sides of the issue and different ethical principles may conflict. She receives a request from another research team that wants access to her complete dataset.
On the one hand, the ethical norm of openness obliges her to share data with the other research team. Another option would be to offer to collaborate with the following are some step that researchers, such as dr. Wexford, can take to deal with ethical dilemmas in research:What is the problem or issue? In this case, the issue is whether to share information with the other research is the relevant information? In this case, there may be other choices besides 'share' or 'don't share,' such as 'negotiate an agreement' or 'offer to collaborate with the researchers. Do ethical codes or policies as well as legal rules apply to these different options? Broader ethical rules, such as openness and respect for credit and intellectual property, may also apply to this case. Laws relating to intellectual property may be there any people who can offer ethical advice? May be useful to seek advice from a colleague, a senior researcher, your department chair, an ethics or compliance officer, or anyone else you can trust. Wexford might want to talk to her supervisor and research team before making a considering these questions, a person facing an ethical dilemma may decide to ask more questions, gather more information, explore different options, or consider other ethical rules. Ideally, a person who makes a decision in an ethical dilemma should be able to justify his or her decision to himself or herself, as well as colleagues, administrators, and other people who might be affected by the decision. Endorsing these methods in this context need not imply that ethical decisions are irrational, however. The main point is that human reasoning plays a pivotal role in ethical decision-making but there are limits to its ability to solve all ethical dilemmas in a finite amount of ing ethical conduct in academic institutions in the us require undergraduate, graduate, or postgraduate students to have some education in the responsible conduct of research (rcr).
The nih and nsf have both mandated training in research ethics for students and trainees. Many academic institutions outside of the us have also developed educational curricula in research of you who are taking or have taken courses in research ethics may be wondering why you are required to have education in research ethics. You may believe that you are highly ethical and know the difference between right and wrong. Indeed, you also may believe that most of your colleagues are highly ethical and that there is no ethics problem in research.. Indeed, the evidence produced so far shows that misconduct is a very rare occurrence in research, although there is considerable variation among various estimates. Of researchers per year (based on confirmed cases of misconduct in federally funded research) to as high as 1% of researchers per year (based on self-reports of misconduct on anonymous surveys). See shamoo and resnik (2015), cited y, it would be useful to have more data on this topic, but so far there is no evidence that science has become ethically corrupt, despite some highly publicized scandals. Even if misconduct is only a rare occurrence, it can still have a tremendous impact on science and society because it can compromise the integrity of research, erode the public’s trust in science, and waste time and resources. In any case, a course in research ethics will have little impact on "bad apples," one might ing to the "stressful" or "imperfect" environment theory, misconduct occurs because various institutional pressures, incentives, and constraints encourage people to commit misconduct, such as pressures to publish or obtain grants or contracts, career ambitions, the pursuit of profit or fame, poor supervision of students and trainees, and poor oversight of researchers (see shamoo and resnik 2015). In any case, a course in research ethics can be useful in helping to prevent deviations from norms even if it does not prevent misconduct. Education in research ethics is can help people get a better understanding of ethical standards, policies, and issues and improve ethical judgment and decision making. Many of the deviations that occur in research may occur because researchers simply do not know or have never thought seriously about some of the ethical norms of research. For example, some unethical authorship practices probably reflect traditions and practices that have not been questioned seriously until recently.
Another example where there may be some ignorance or mistaken traditions is conflicts of interest in research. A researcher may think that a "normal" or "traditional" financial relationship, such as accepting stock or a consulting fee from a drug company that sponsors her research, raises no serious ethical issues. Or perhaps a university administrator sees no ethical problem in taking a large gift with strings attached from a pharmaceutical company. Maybe a physician thinks that it is perfectly appropriate to receive a $300 finder’s fee for referring patients into a clinical "deviations" from ethical conduct occur in research as a result of ignorance or a failure to reflect critically on problematic traditions, then a course in research ethics may help reduce the rate of serious deviations by improving the researcher's understanding of ethics and by sensitizing him or her to the y, education in research ethics should be able to help researchers grapple with the ethical dilemmas they are likely to encounter by introducing them to important concepts, tools, principles, and methods that can be useful in resolving these dilemmas. Scientists must deal with a number of different controversial topics, such as human embryonic stem cell research, cloning, genetic engineering, and research involving animal or human subjects, which require ethical reflection and b. Icist and niehs irb d@ the browser controls to adjust the font size, or print this is ethics in research & why is it important? 515: ethical standards in the conduct of rs and researchers bear the primary responsibility for the monitoring and rigorous evaluation of procedures and results of research and other scholarly activities under their supervision. All members of the university community shall adhere to the university's strict standards of integrity of academic scholarship and research and must feel ethically obligated to report (in accordance with the procedures set forth in this policy) any fraudulent acts when they are known or are suspected to have occurred. Within the framework of the existing policies of the nevada system of higher education (nshe) and the university, including review guidelines, scholars and researchers are free to:A. With the freedom to conduct and manage scholarly activities and research comes the academic responsibility for:A. Ethical standards of performance in research and scholarship:Researchers and scholars shall seek to uphold the following general ethical standards in the performance of their activities:1. Scholars and researchers must not fall below accepted professional standards in proposing their activities, carrying them out, and reporting their results. All participants in scholarly/research activity must avoid both intentional and negligent behavior which may result in violation of the law; dishonesty or fraud; fabrication, falsification, or misrepresentation of data; or plagiarism.
Present or proposed activities or relationships which may present a conflict of interest, affect the objectivity of research or scholarship, give the appearance of being motivated by private financial gain, or involve unacceptable commitments for a scholar/researcher, must be disclosed and approved at the appropriate administrative levels prior to a commitment to or initiation of such activities or relationships. As part of its efforts to promote research integrity, the university provides training in the responsible conduct of research (rcr) that covers the following nine instructional areas:A. Research faculty will participate in rcr instruction in ways that will foster their role as requirements apply to all undergraduates, graduate students, and postdoctoral researchers who will be supported by nsf to conduct research. The university will verify that those students (undergraduates and graduates) and postdoctoral researchers who receive nsf funds (support from salary and/or stipends to conduct research on nsf grants) will obtain rcr policy requires that all trainees, fellows, participants, and scholars receiving support through any nih training, career development award (individual or institutional), research education grant, and dissertation research grant must receive instruction in responsible conduct of research. As per the code of federal regulations, a finding of research misconduct requires that:A. There be a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community for maintaining the integrity of the research record; andb. Research misconduct is committed with a "reckless disregard of accepted practices" when an individual makes a false, fabricated, or plagiarized representation with a conscious disregard as to whether or not the representation is true, accurate, or requires attribution to another. The quantity and substance of irregularities or departures from standard practice in the research community by the individual, including the period of time over which they occurred, or the individual's indifference for the integrity of the research data and images, demonstrate the unreliability of the representation. 1 of the nshe code cites grounds for instituting disciplinary action against "all members of the faculty of the system" specific to this policy is the prohibition against "acts of academic dishonesty, including but not limited to cheating, plagiarism, falsifying research data or results, or assisting others to do the same. Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. Falsification" is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record. Procedures for dealing with allegations of misconduct or violations of ethical standards in research and scholarship:Allegations of misconduct shall be dealt with in strict accordance with the provisions of chapter 6 of the nshe code. Allegations of misconduct in research or other projects sponsored by applicable federal regulatory agencies are specifically addressed in section following procedural statements incorporate the appropriate sections of the nshe code in delineating the university's administrative process for the reporting of allegations of scholarly misconduct; for the fair, swift, and accurate consideration of such allegations; and for initiating the actions recommended after the consideration of allegations is complete.
Reporting of allegations: reports of allegations of research misconduct must be filed with the vice president for research and innovation (vpri) as the designated university administrative officer for complaints of research misconduct in accordance with nshe code 6. He/she may seek the advice and assistance of the director, research integrity office (rio), subject matter experts, and/or scientific peers of the individual about whom the allegations are made. Rio will ensure that all reporting requirements to the federal office of research integrity (ori) are met. The vpri, as the administrative officer, shall investigate the report of research misconduct pursuant to the provisions in nshe code 6. For hearings dealing with allegations of research misconduct, the following special considerations shall be made concerning the selection of the hearing committee. In the case of a special hearing, the special hearing committee should include persons having sufficient acquaintance with research and scholarship in the discipline in question so that the allegation may be properly assessed. Special procedures for dealing with allegations of misconduct in science relating to research or other projects sponsored by applicable federal agencies:The following procedures apply to allegations of misconduct made against university of nevada, reno faculty investigators, associates, and other personnel in connection with work on a research or other sponsored project supported by applicable federal regulatory or funding university shall comply with the established administrative process for reviewing, investigating, and reporting allegations of misconduct in research as set forth in chapter 6 of the nshe code. The following are summaries of special requirements of 42 cfr part 93, subparts a-e: public health service policies on research misconduct. Institutional assurance: the university, through the office of the vpri, shall submit annually to the phs office of scientific integrity (osi) and hhs office of research integrity (rio):A. Role of the office of the vice president for research and innovation: it is essential that the vpri be informed immediately upon disclosure of allegations of research misconduct if these allegations in any way involve project activities sponsored by an applicable federal regulatory or funding agency. Rio will take the following specific steps to obtain, secure, and maintain the research records. Research records" means any data or results that embody the facts resulting from scholarly inquiry. A research record includes, but is not limited to, grant and contract applications, whether funded or unfunded; grant or contract progress and other reports; laboratory notebooks; notes; correspondence; videos; photographs; x-ray records; slides; experimental materials; computer files and printouts; manuscripts and publications; equipment use logs; laboratory procurement records; animal facility records; human and animal subject protocols; consent forms; medical charts; and patient research files.
Take all reasonable and practical steps to obtain custody of all research records and evidence needed to conduct research misconduct inquiry;ii. Store in a secure manner, except in those cases where the research records or evidence encompass scientific instruments shared by a number of uses, in which case custody may be limited to copies of the data or evidence on such instruments, so long as those copies are substantially equivalent to the evidentiary value of the instruments;iv. Undertake all reasonable and practical efforts to take custody of additional research records and evidence discovered during the course of the research misconduct inquiry. Notify individuals aware of or involved in the inquiry or investigation of the final outcome of no finding of research misconduct [42 cfr 93. A statement of whether the institution found research misconduct, and if so, who committed the misconduct;iii.
