Introduction
Education in responsible conduct is essential because unethical or compromised behaviors on the part of researchers lead the public to lose trust in the research community. When trust is lost, credibility is lost. When credibility is lost, the opportunity to improve human well-being and protect the environmental is lost. When belief that science can make a difference is lost, funding for research is lost.
The America Competes Act states that any graduate student, undergraduate student or postdoctoral associate (also includes volunteers) who receive support from a federal award MUST have instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research. (Support includes salary, stipends, travel funds, supplies and materials, etc). Education and training in the responsible conduct of research (RCR) cover the following nine instructional areas:
Data Acquisition, Management, Sharing and Ownership; Conflict of Interest and Commitment; Human Subjects; Animal Welfare; Research Misconduct; Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship; Mentor / Trainee Responsibilities; Peer Review; Collaborative Science. Also included and important is the financial management of the grant funds and the appropriate charging of research expenses.
During the 2003-2004 Academic year, the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies initiated a discussion group on Responsible Conduct in Research. This series of discussions revolved around case studies that were designed to facilitate open exchanges about what constitutes responsible conduct in science. These discussions were convened by Marie F. Smith, CRA, Grants Administrator/Compliance Officer, and were attended by the members of the scientific community (Scientists, Postdocs, Research Specialists and Project Assistants) and members of the administrative staff. Once a month a member of the Scientific Staff chose the discussion topic for presentation and led the discussion. Most discussion leaders chose to write their own case study in collaboration with various members of the scientific and administrative community.
From the outset, the group went beyond clear-cut cases of unethical conduct, such as plagiarism or falsification of data. Instead, the group shaped the case studies to delve into the gray areas of ethical conduct- the situations where individuals differ in their perceptions and interpretations of what constitutes ethical behavior and a fair situation for all involved. These case studies went to the core of how individuals can be productive scientists and interact with each other in an atmosphere of trust and respect. These case studies were deliberately written to be thought provoking in an attempt to engage members of the community in constructive conversations and to raise awareness of harmful behaviors and practices. Our experience was that these case studies taught us a lot about one another, and were instrumental in creating an atmosphere where we can openly discuss "sensitive" subjects. Because of this, we felt it was very important to share these with others who may be interested.
The case studies are available by clicking on the links below. If you are planning to use one or more of our original case studies, we ask that credit be given to the author(s) and to the Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies.
Currently, our training consists of a series of online training modules on the various topics in responsible conduct. In addition, a binder with up-to-date reference material on these topics will be made available in the library. Reference books and material covering responsible conduct and research will also be available in the Grants and Compliance Office. The online training will be supplemented with a periodic seminar and in lab training. Training in financial management is done in an on-going, individual basis. Our policy on Scientific Misconduct is available in the policy manual located on our intranet.
If you are doing animal research or serving on the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, there is more training available on the OLAW website at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/tutorial/index.htm
If you are doing human research (surveys) or serving on the Institutional Review Board Committee, there is more training available on the NIH website at http://phrp.nihtraining.com/users/login.php
Discussion Group Meetings
June 10, 2005
Postdoctoral Experience at IES
Led by Dr. Jonathan Jeschke
Sigma Xi Survey Summary
January 11, 2005
Harrassment, Worship, Admiration or Imagination?
Led by Marie F. Smith, CRA
Case Study
June 16, 2004
On Being a Responsible Scientist
Led by Dr. Clive Jones
Case Study
Additional reading 1
Additional reading 2
May 13, 2004
Personal Conduct & Harassment
Led by Dr. Maria Uriarte
Case Study
April 22, 2004
The Other Side of Collaboration: Maintaining the Balance of Power
Led by Dr. Valerie Eviner and Ms. Marie Smith
Case Study
April, 2004 - Presentation to the Board of Directors
Mentoring & Ethics
Led by Drs. Holly Ewing and Maria Uriarte
Case Study
March 18, 2004
Collaboration
Co-Led by Drs. Valerie Eviner and Kathleen Weathers
Case Study
February 19, 2004
Publication & Authorship
Led by Dr. Jonathan Jeschke
Case Study
discussion in the mailing list ECOLOG-L
January 15, 2004
Ownership of Research Materials
Led by Dr. Peter Groffman
Case Study
Data Access Policy for the LTER Network
December 18, 2003
Mentoring & Ethics
Case Study
Led by Dr. Maria Uriarte
Publication:
Other Related Links:
Other Related Readings:
|
