Ethics and the Responsible Conduct of Research for Graduate ...

Ethics and the Responsible Conduct
of Research for Graduate Education
and Beyond
Kellina Craig-Henderson, Ph.D.
Program Director
and Human Subjects Research
Protections Officer
National Science Foundation
2/9/2011 1

Responsible conduct in the
research enterprise is a shared
responsibility.
2/9/2011 2

The Belmont Report
Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the
Protection of Human Subjects of Research
45 CFR 690
(same as 45 CFR 46- HHS)
The Common Rule for the protection
of human subjects
(www.bfa/dias/policy/docs/45cfr690.pdf)
2/9/2011 3

•Respect for Persons
•Beneficence
•Justice
2/9/2011 4

Respect for persons
This principle has 2 separate moral
requirements:
1. Respect individuals’ autonomy.
2. In the case of diminished
autonomy,consult their legally
authorized representative.
2/9/2011 5

Beneficence
Two general rules apply here:
1. Do not harm!
2. Maximize possible benefits,
and minimize possible harms.
2/9/2011 6

Justice
“Who should receive the
benefits of research and bear
its burdens?”
To each person an equal share.
To each person according to individual need.
To each person according to individual
effort.
To each person according to societal
contribution.
To each person according to merit.
2/9/2011 7

Responsibility
•The Sponsor
•The Grantee
•The Researcher
2/9/2011 8

National Science
Foundation
One sponsor’s responsibility
includes:
RCR requirement
2/9/2011 9

America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote
Excellence in Technology, Education and Science Act: The
America COMPETES Act
Legislative history:
Introduced - May 10, 2007
Passed House - May 22, 2007
Passed Senate – July 19, 2007
Differences resolved – Aug 2, 2007
Signed by President – Aug 9, 2007
2/9/2011 10

America
COMPETES Act –
SEC. 7009
“The Director shall require that each institution
that applies for financial assistance from the
Foundation for science and engineering research
or education describe in its grant proposal a plan
to provide appropriate training and oversight in the
responsible and ethical conduct of research to
undergraduate students, graduate students, and
postdoctoral researchers participating in the
proposed research project.” 11

Responsibility
•The Sponsor
•The Grantee
•The Researcher
2/9/2011 12

Ethics in Research
Grantee’s responsibility…
•Context-driven
•Environmentdependent
2/9/2011 13

Empirical study
•Martinson et al., 2006 provides support for the
effect of the contexts of science on misconduct:
• Perceptions of procedural injustice are
associated with self reports of
misbehaviors.
• This relationship is strongest among earlycareer
scientists, those in un-tenurable
positions, female scientists in traditionallymale
fields.
2/9/2011 14

Responsibility
•The Sponsor
•The Grantee
•The Researcher
2/9/2011 15

Scientists
behaving badly
2/9/2011 16

Top 10 Misbehaviors
• Falsifying or “cooking” research data
• Ignoring major aspects of human subjects
requirements
• Not properly disclosing involvement in forms
whose products are based on one’s own research
• Relationships with students, research subjects or
clients that may be interpreted as questionable
• Using another’s ideas without obtaining
permission or giving due credit
2/9/2011 17

Top 10 misbehaviors cont’d:
• Unauthorized use of confidential information in
connection with one’s own research.
• Failing to present data that contradict one’s own
previous research.
• Circumventing certain minor aspects of HS
requirements (e.g., informed consent).
• Overlooking others use of flawed data or
questionable interpretation of data.
• Changing the design, methodology or results of
a study in response to pressure from a funding
source.
18

Empirical study
•De Vries et al., 2006 provides evidence of
everyday misbehaviors among researchers.
•They conclude that many of these
misbehaviors are “normal” misbehaviors.
• Must direct attention to the social
conditions, and context that lead to these
unacceptable misbehaviors.
2/9/2011 19
2/9/2011

Research misconduct is
not rare
What is considered misconduct varies by
• The Sponsor
• The Grantee
• The Researcher
2/9/2011 20

When you observe
potential misconduct,
what should you do?
It depends….
2/9/2011 21

1. Constructive confrontation
2. Conflict management
3. Grievance processes
4. Whistle-blowing
2/9/2011 22

Reducing
misconduct in
research starts
with
TRAINING!!!
2/9/2011 23

Case study 1
• A graduate student is conducting a study to find out how
bilingual English-Spanish speaking students navigate bicultural,
bilingual identity in a rural high school setting. The
study will take place in small town in Eastern Washington
State that has one high school with approximately 400
students. The research methods include: weekly interviews,
and in-depth classroom observation of four Spanish-English
bilingual 14 – 17 year old students over one academic
year. The researcher will also conduct interviews with
administration, teachers, parents, and other students about
their thoughts on language and local identity. What are
some of ethical issues inherent in the design of this
study? What are some of the ethical issues that might
unfold during the conduct of the study?
24

Case 2: Who Owns the
Field Notes?
• Jerry Vaughn contracted with a federal agency to conduct a social
impact assessment of proposed topographic changes in an
aboriginal habitat in a far north region of North America. The contract
contained no stipulations regarding ownership of data. In order to
determine the potential impacts on the culture of peoples living in
that region, Vaughn engaged in participant observation (keeping a
detailed field notebook of same); conducted in-depth personal
interviews; and took over 1,000 photographs of people working,
socializing, and enjoying other everyday and special activities.
2/9/2011 25

Case 3: Professor Purloins
Student's Work: Her Recourse?
Joelle Smith wrote an elaborate research proposal
that was to be submitted to the National Science
Foundation (NSF) for her doctoral dissertation
research. Her dissertation supervisor signed off on
the proposal indicating his support of the project
and his willingness to supervise Smith's work. The
project was funded for a two-year period. Smith went
into the field and at regular intervals sent copies of
her field notes and other written data, along with
preliminary analyses of her field problem, to her
2/9/2011 26
dissertation advisor.

For more information, if you are a
researcher (student or otherwsie) please
feel free to contact your Institutional
Official (IO), or if you are an IO or
member of the Sponsored Research
Office, please contact your Funding
Agency (i.e., program officer or human
subjects protections officer), or the
Office for Human Research Protections
(OHRP) of HHS.
2/9/2011 27

Contact Information:
Kellina M. Craig-Henderson, PhD
(703) 292-7023
Khenders@nsf.gov
Social Psychology program
National Sceince Foundation
4201 Wilson Blvd., 995.45
Arlington, VA 22230
2/9/2011 28