Ethics and Research Integrity

Transcription

1 OmniScience: A Multi-disciplinary Journal Volume 3, Issue 1, ISSN: Ethics and Research Integrity Subhash C. Arya* Electronics and Communication Engineering Department, School of Technology, North Eastern Hill University, Shillong, Meghalaya, India Abstract Research can be defined as search for knowledge or systematic investigation to establish the truth. Scientific research is application of scientific method, harnessing of curiosity for explaining the nature and properties of the world around us. The role of a scientist is to acquire knowledge by engaging himself in scientific activities. A scientist has more social responsibility. Each scientist does not behave with complete honesty towards present and future scientists, the construction of scientific progress, built on the honesty of past scientists, is in danger of collapsing. The temptation to publish hastily, to misinterpret results or to publish fraudulent results is greater now than it has ever been, and scientific malfeasance in the developed and developing countries has made the headlines worldwide. In the present paper, efforts are made to review on comprehensive discussion of ethical problems encountered during the publication process. Ethical infringes such as data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism and redundant and duplicate publications are a few examples. In the present paper, efforts are also made to collect the problems/reasons generally faced by today s competent young scientists and impact of ethics in the scientific research quality. How this heavy burden of responsibility results into the temptation to rush to publish results that have not been adequately reproduced is also explained. A few case studies in context with Indian scenario are also explained. Keywords: Ethics, scientific research, *Author for Correspondence aryasubh@yahoo.co.in INTRODUCTION TO RESEARCH ETHICS Ethics or moral philosophy can be defined as law philosophy that addresses questions about morality, i.e., concepts such as good and evil, right and wrong, justice, virtue, etc., whereas research ethics involves the application of fundamental ethical principles to a variety of topics involving scientific research. These include the design and implementation of research involving human experimentation, animal experimentation, various aspects of academic scandal, including scientific misconduct (such as fraud, fabrication of data, falsification and plagiarism), etc. The present paper reviews on the reasons for the unethical behavior of young scientists while they do research. The efforts are also made to brief the outcomes of unethical behaviors in scientific research with a few Indian case studies. HISTORY OF SCIENTIFIC MISCONDUCT IN INDIA In India, the issue of scientific misconduct attained public awareness in the early 1981 ( when a large number of scientists felt the need for improving the climate of scientific research to promote integrity, objectivity and ethical values. A few scientists met in Delhi during 1981 and formed a group at national level. In 1984, the society was named Society for Scientific Values. Various committees were formed at national level that laid down the guidelines and 107 founder members were enrolled, and the society was registered under the Societies Registration Act (1860) on 18th August, 1986 with the following aims and objectives (society for scientific values (SSV): To promote integrity, objectivity and ethical values in the pursuit of science. To cooperate with other scientific organizations for propagation of the objectives of the Society. OSMJ (2013) 8-15 STM Journals All Rights Reserved Page 8

2 Ethics and Research Integrity Subhash C. Arya To secure and administer funds, grants and endowments for the furtherance of the objectives of the Society. To do all other things that may be necessary for the fulfillment of the objectives of the Society. All income of the Society to be utilized towards the promotion of the aims and objectives of the Society. Since then, SSV is involved in conducting various workshops for creating awareness about scientific values and misconduct in younger generation. Also, SSV is contributing by analyzing the published papers by eminent scientists bringing the issues of unethical practices in the public and hence creating a situation for younger generation to learn from mistakes of others. SSV also publishes a national newsletter. It has listed several numbers of unethical papers published by vice-chancellors and heads of departments of institutes of national importance. Interested reader may find more details on ( Forms of Scientific Misconducts Benos et al. (2010) listed the scientific misconduct such as fabrication, falsification, manipulation and plagiarism. Fabrication is recording or presenting (in any format) fictitious data. Falsification is manipulation of data or experimental procedures to produce desired outcome or to avoid a complicating or inexplicable result. Plagiarism is using someone else s words, ideas, or results without attribution. It further explains that for an action to be considered misconduct, it must be serious deviation from accepted practices... of the relevant research community, have been.committed intentionally, or knowingly, or recklessly...and it must be proven by a preponderance of evidence. [1]. What is Meant by Researcher? And Possible Reasons for Young Scientists Misconduct Researcher can be defined as the member of community with curiosity, cooperation, and intellectual rigor involved in observing or explaining something that no one has ever observed or explained, answering some of the most fundamental questions, doing the scientific work which has direction and immediate impact on lives of people worldwide ( 2009). National Academy of Sciences (2010) has defined researcher as A researcher is one who conducts the research based on same ethical values that apply in everyday life, including honesty, fairness, objectivity, openness, trustworthiness, and respect for others. Research should meet the scientific standards which refer to the application of these values in the context of research. Examples are openness in sharing research materials, fairness in reviewing grant proposals, respect for one s colleagues and students, and honesty in reporting research results (National Academy of Sciences, 2010). Today s most of the young researcher is tempted to publish hastily, misinterpreting the results or publishing fraudulent results [2]. This very behavior of today s young scientist might be because of the information available on internet at a click, and inattention or they do not have time to explain why the decision was made or an action for their research was taken. We cannot blame singly the young scientists, but institutions are also responsible for such behavior. Institutional guidelines are very confusing and ambiguous; the scientists do not get the best guidance from their research supervisors. Hence, they are involved in such irresponsible practices. Körner (2009) mentioned some of the unfortunate reasons for such behaviors viz., lucrative salaries and additional income, negative impact on the pursuit of natural truths, etc. Misconduct by young researchers has been observed in the recent years not only in developing countries but also in developed countries worldwide [2]. Recently, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, published a book titled On Being a Scientist: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in Research elaborating some possible reasons such as: (i) Whenever a new researcher starts research, young scientist always considers the reported data as valid. They follow published literature because of the great faith in reported literature by others. If the reported literature itself is faulty the young scientist may get misguided. As rightly said by Humberto (2009) that scientific report is based in previous work OSMJ (2013) 8-15 STM Journals All Rights Reserved Page 9

3 OmniScience: A Multi-disciplinary Journal Volume 3, Issue 1, ISSN: done by others similar to what occurs in literature, art and other human endeavor. [3]. (ii) Society trusts that the results of research reflect on honest attempt by scientists to describe the world accurately and without bias. But this trust will prolong only if the scientific community devotes itself to exemplify and transmit the values associated with ethical scientific conduct ( (iii) It is also mentioned that exciting opportunities though are available at multiple rates even faster than resources; the resulting disparity between opportunities and resources has further reduced the time available for researchers to discuss professional standards. (iv) As research has become more interdisciplinary and multinational, it has become more difficult to ensure that communication among the members of a research project is sufficient. (v) Increased ties among academic, industrial, and governmental researchers have strengthened research but have also increased the potential for conflicts. (vi)the rapid advance of technology, including digital communications technologies, has created a wealth of new capabilities and new challenges. Through the spread of internet and distance education, the concept of education ethics has gained different meaning [4]. Lack of communication and perception of social gap between individuals who receive education and educators who meet in different environment and geographies constitutes a dilemma along with the advantages of technical side of this application. In the United States, the government as well as scientists have become more responsible towards the unethical practices. Recently, a few survey-based studies were conducted on views on plagiarism and use of anti-plagiarism tool by scientists [5, 6]. The prospective academicians had negative attitude towards the anti-plagiarism tool, they plagiarized due to foreign language problems, time constraints, and lack of knowledge about plagiarism. REQUIREMENT OF ETHICAL/UNET HICAL RESEARCH Following are some of the obligations for doing ethical research: Selecting the Research Topic Research work is a sequential process that involves planning a study and getting ethical, financial and administrative approval in conducting, collecting, collating and analyzing data and finally reporting the results in logical conclusions derived therein [7]. Hence, every time we allocate funds to certain scientific objectives or goals, first question we must ask: is the pursuit of this scientific knowledge worthy? Is it worthwhile to do research on this topic, what is the benefit of this research to the society? The research topic should be creative and innovative. If the selected research topic is creative and innovative then there are very few chances of plagiarism [8], though it is said that no creative work is devoid of plagiarism. Bamfield (2004) defines creativity and innovation, as to create means to bring into being or to form out of nothing. Hence, research is redefined as making something new out of previously unconnected ideas or observations. Hence, creativity is an active process by which a genuinely new idea is produced. Therefore, creation happens by chance, but research is a product of much prior knowledge and ideas [9]. Creative ideas at an individual level can be stimulated by (i) Thinking freely: the researcher should be given full freedom to think what if or why did this happen; (ii) Carrying out more number of experiments, or putting an idea to test is more important freedom in relative work, type of experiment that often lead to serendipity; (iii) Discussing the unrelated facts with people produces new ideas. Once the topic is decided then designing the experiments, investigations, presenting the results using proper research methodology can prevent the unethical practices in research. During this process, young scientist refers to the literature as science is the cumulative enterprise in which new research builds on previous results [10]. If the research results published by one researcher are inaccurate, other researcher who is referring to it will waste time and resources trying to replicate or extend those results. If it is not corrected, this can hold back the entire field of research and progress in that field may slow down. Hence, OSMJ (2013) 8-15 STM Journals All Rights Reserved Page 10

4 Ethics and Research Integrity Subhash C. Arya it is the responsibility of researcher to mentor the next generation who will build their work in the current research discoveries [10]. Personal Standards One must learn what is good and ethical from some role model or moral example. Religion often raises certain stories about certain people to this level deliberately. Irresponsible conduct in research can make it impossible to achieve a goal, whether that goal is earning a degree, renewing a grant, achieving tenure, or maintaining a reputation as a productive and honest researcher. Adhering to professional standards builds personal integrity in a research career. High ambition, i.e., desire to publish largest number of papers may lead to publish faulty results [2]. Ignorant young scientist thinks that it is ok if they copy someone else s part of work and show it as their own. Now, it is high time they will have to make themselves aware about this crime and they can be penalized for it. Self plagiarism is nothing but the reuse of portion of one s previous writings without taking permission of publisher, which is both unlawful and unethical [11]. According to Beisiegel [12], the basic principle for professional conduct of science in all countries and all disciplines is honesty towards oneself and towards others. Therefore, it is utmost important that the scientific community prevents scientific misconduct by fostering research integrity. In many papers, it is seen that the authorship is given to a person without his or her contribution neither intellectually nor practically. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors formed the guidelines for authorship. These guidelines recommend that authorship be awarded to those who make a substantial contribution to (I) conception and design; (II) acquisition of or analysis and interpretation of data; (III) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and (IV) final approval of the version to be published. In the review The most frequently committed scientific misconduct; violation of authorship rights and suggestions of solutions explained in addition of these few more conditions: one should have participated sufficiently in the work to take full responsibility for the content. One should be able to defend, without help from co-authors, the work, the results, and everything else that has been included in the manuscript. All authors carry the responsibility for collective publication if their contributions are not specifically identified by their name. Therefore, authorship eligibility criteria must be applied strictly to all scientific works [13]. Serving the Society Some scientific research takes birth to meet the need of people and they directly affect the health and well-being of the individuals for example, in medical field effect of certain drug treatments, clinical trials or toxicological studies, additives added in food for extending the shelf life. This scientific knowledge is directly used by policy makers (Food and Drug Administration) to make informed decisions. Hence, it is in the hand of a researcher to convert the research into ethical or unethical. Employer Requirement Some of the institutions demand for the research publications, pressure of the head of the institution on the researcher may lead to wrong scientific publication. In the career advancement scheme, it is compulsory to have stated number of scientific publications ( UGC revised rules and regulation for teachers, July, 2010), hence, the researcher to meet these requirements may publish the results without prior confirmation or required number of experiments. Hi-Tech At the click of a button and in the high-tech world of computer images, it is becoming more common to publish the same figure more than once [1]. For example, if it is a microscopic section, rotating it, cropping it, or enhancing parts of it can make it appear to be a new illustration [14]. Internet has become new source of writings [15] and it has become very easy to copy and paste and hence the plagiarism has risen. Original Language is Different from English Usually, the first author, who is not necessarily the same as the corresponding author, does not have English as his/her mother tongue, and struggles to represent the background to their work in good English in the Introduction, or to OSMJ (2013) 8-15 STM Journals All Rights Reserved Page 11

5 OmniScience: A Multi-disciplinary Journal Volume 3, Issue 1, ISSN: explore articulately the significance of the results in the discussion and conclusions [6]. Under these circumstances, many such authors succumb to the temptation to use eloquent phrases, sentences or even whole paragraphs found in recently published papers in order to improve their own work. Williams (2007) says that the intention is understandable, this practice is not acceptable, and we have to make it clear that this use of other people s words in published scientific papers is morally wrong and is included within the definition of scientific plagiarism [16]. What is Meant by Research Supervisor? Mentor or research supervisor plays a very important role in shaping the scientist. When a young scientist starts the career, the mentor provides expertise to less experienced or negligible experienced scientist to help them to advance their career, enhance their education and very importantly built the network. Mentors can be a fellow researcher, research assistant, administrator or supporting staff. Indeed, it is useful to build a diverse community of mentors ( This diversity in mentors will help to have expertise and background to satisfy all the need of a mentee. Mentors themselves can benefit greatly from the mentoring that they provide. Through mentoring others, researchers can be exposed to new ideas, build a strong research program and network of collaborators, and gain the friendship and respect of beginning researchers. Advisers and mentors often have considerable influence over the lives of beginning researchers, and they must be careful not to abuse their authority. The relationship between an adviser or mentor and an advisee or mentee can be complex, and conflicts can arise over the allocation of credit, publication practices, or the proper division of responsibilities. The main role of an adviser or mentor is to help a researcher move along a productive and successful career trajectory. By maintaining and modeling high standards of conduct, advisers and mentors gain the moral authority to demand the same of others. A good mentor is one who always thinks for the betterment of the mentee imbibing the ethics in them. For mentee, mentor is role model. Professor Qazi, Vice-Chancellor of Jamia Hamdard University, shared his experience in one of the research methodology training courses at AIIMS, New Delhi. He said, when he newly joined the university as Vice-Chancellor, the total average number of publications of his university was large. Afterwards, he made a system in which every researcher before submission of paper must present it before the committee including him. He made it possible to present and give feedback. He mentioned that though the number has decreased as compared to earlier, its impact factor has increased manifold. Examples of Scientific Misconducts Publishing the Data Plagiarism, fabrication of results, misrepresenting contributions to a paper, bypassing informed consent, stealing ideas, and other forms of scientific misconduct have a detrimental effect on science [17]. A fundamental principle of academic science is the ability to replicate published research. Studies cannot be replicated if scientists do not share additional data, information, or materials from published studies, and upholding such ethical norms is every scientist s responsibility. Authorship When a paper is published, the list of authors indicates who have contributed to the work. Apportioning credit for work done as a team can be difficult, but the peer recognition generated by authorship is important in a scientific career and needs to be allocated appropriately. Deciding on authorship before the study begins is good idea though in a study that takes years to complete the research, the research team may change. All authors should have seen and approved the final version as submitted for publication, and whatever the journal s policy is, it is a good idea to agree as the study progresses on what roles deserve authorship as opposed to acknowledgement. Policies at most scientific journals state that a person should be listed as the author of a paper only if that person made a direct and substantial intellectual contribution to the design of the research, the interpretation of the data, or the drafting of the paper, although OSMJ (2013) 8-15 STM Journals All Rights Reserved Page 12

6 Ethics and Research Integrity Subhash C. Arya students will find that scientific fields and specific journals vary in their policies. Just providing the laboratory space for a project or furnishing a sample used in the research is not sufficient to be included as an author, though such contributions may be recognized in a footnote or in a separate acknowledgment section. Proper Acknowledgement or Credit Acknowledgment is defined as a statement of gratitude for assistance in producing a work. The Acknowledgment section of paper or document is the place where one can and/or should thank all those people who are not listed as authors but whose efforts contributed to the research described in the paper and to the preparation of the paper itself [18]. It may be tempting to adopt a useful idea from an article, manuscript, or even a casual conversation without giving credit to the originator of that idea. But researchers have an obligation to be scrupulously honest with themselves and with others regarding the use of others ideas. This allows readers to locate the original source the author has used to justify a conclusion, and to find more detailed information about how earlier work was done and how the current work differs. Researchers also are expected to treat the information in a manuscript submitted to a journal to be considered for publication or a grant proposal submitted to an agency for funding as confidential. Acknowledgment section, almost always printed in smaller type than the paper itself, used to be very simple. Author would thank their secretaries and one or two other people and mention who provided funds for the research. The acknowledgment section can also be used to thank others who contributed to the work reported by the paper. Before thanking anyone, it should be asked to the person for thanking them for what they did; if that contribution actually merits full authorship, then they will appear in the authors list. How to Prevent Scientific Misconduct? Collaboration of Scientist and Ethicists Ethicists and scientists should work hand in hand to assure that scientific research is done to the highest ethical standards, and to prepare the public for reception of scientific innovation. The cloning of Dolly has become the exemplar of the failure to prepare the public for a scientific breakthrough. After the announcement, polls showed that more than 90% of Americans opposed the cloning of animals. Furthermore, the media were filled with stories about creating human clones for organ transplants, celebrity vanity clones, etc., before scientists could reign in the wild speculation and describe what cloning is and what it can and cannot do. Taking Personal Responsibility Scientists in modern technological societies are professionals, and their work should be viewed through the lens of professional ethics [19]. Scientists, like all professionals, have ethical responsibilities at three levels: First, scientists must assume personal responsibility for the integrity of their research, their relations with colleagues and subordinates, and their role as representatives of their home institutions. Second, scientists must assume a measure of disciplinary responsibility for the promotion, oversight, and collective activity of their specialized field of inquiry. Finally, scientists must recognize their social responsibility to science as a public enterprise. Scientists have an obligation, individually as well as collectively, to reflect on the ends, not just the means, of scientific work. Ethical conversation should be part of normal science in every laboratory, academic center, and corporate office. Sometimes, that ethical responsibility may run counter to the practices of an institution or corporation; in those cases, scientific integrity demands that individual scientists respond by speaking out, or by trying to change the corporate culture. In rare cases, it may require refusing to participate in a particular project, or in extreme cases, resigning. Inclusion of Ethics in the Curriculum The students come from a diverse range of cultural backgrounds with their own but differing established set of values and beliefs. In the class, students should be provided with a brief overview about role of the professional engineers and the importance of ethical behavior. Use of New Technologies or Statistical Methods Because digital technologies are rapidly changing, some data stored electronically may be inaccessible in a few years unless OSMJ (2013) 8-15 STM Journals All Rights Reserved Page 13

7 OmniScience: A Multi-disciplinary Journal Volume 3, Issue 1, ISSN: provisions are made to transport the data from one platform to another. New forms of publication are challenging traditional practices associated with publication and the evaluation of scholarly work. Ethical principles do set limits on technology, but this is unremarkable. We need limits to be set so that new technologies do not cause harm, violate personal privacy or autonomy, damage a collectively owned natural environment, and so on. Verifying the Data by Discussing with the Colleagues Every research organization has a system while awarding a PhD degree, a research student has to present his or her work in front of all faculties of the department and defend the data or work he/she has presented. During this presenting, many additions and deletions suggestions come from the faculties other than the guide. Discussing with colleagues results into generation of newer ideas and every individual thinks differently; this may help in prevention of unethical practices. CONCLUSIONS Unethical practices have become the growing problem in all the countries. Keeping this a very serious issue, government organizations have set some standard rules and regulations to prevent unethical practices. Also, with the advanced technology, plagiarism detection tools are available online. The unethical practices are followed by young researchers due to mere negligence and unawareness. It is the duty of the research supervisor, teachers, heads of the departments, vice-chancellors, librarians to start a campaign against unethical practices in academics. The new researcher must be trained first and made aware about unethical practices and their consequences. Also maintaining personal standard of ethics will help in eradication of unethical practices. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author is grateful to the Vice-Chancellor, HOD (ECE), and Dean (SOT) of NEHU, Shillong, for permission and providing financial help to attend the training program in Research Methodology at AIIMS, New Delhi, which enriched the knowledge on the above discussed subject. REFERENCES 1. Benos DJ, Vollmer SH. Generalizing on Best Practices in Image Processing: A Model for Promoting Research Integrity Commentary on: Avoiding Twisted Pixels: Ethical Guidelines for the Appropriate Use and Manipulation of Scientific Digital Images. Science and Engineering Ethics 2010; 16(4): p. 2. Körner AM. Letter to a Young Scientist. Current Science 2009; 97(7): p. 3. Humberto RB. Plagiarism in Scientific Publications. Rev. méd. Chile 2009; 137(1):7 9 (doi: /S ). 4. Erturgut R, Serhat Soyşekerci S. Ethic Dimension and Social Consequences of Distance Education Applications. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2010; 2: p. 5. Aasheim C., Rutner P., Li L. Attitudes On Plagiarism in Programming Courses: Results From A Survey Of Student Perceptions ( oc/p pdf ) 6. Eret E., Gokmenoglu T. Plagiarism in Higher Education: A Case Study with Prospective Academicians. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2010; 2: p. 7. Gupta YK., Padhey BM. Synthesis of a Thesis, Section F of Scientific Communication 2009; Chap 28: p. 8. Misra A. Refining a Research Manuscript. Journal of Young Pharmacist 2010; 2(3): p. 9. Bamfield P. Creativity and Nurturing of Innovation 2004; Chap. 1 (DOI: / ch7). 10. Gupta Y K. DST-AIIMS Sponsored Workshop on Research Methodology 2010; September, Jones A. Technology: Illegal, Immoral, Or Fattening? Proceedings ACM SIGUCCS User Services Conference 2004; p. 12. Beisiegel U. Research Integrity and Publication Ethics. Atherosclerosis 2010; 212(2): p. 13. Api M. The Most Frequently Committed Scientific Misconduct; Violation of Authorship Rights and Suggestions of OSMJ (2013) 8-15 STM Journals All Rights Reserved Page 14

8 Ethics and Research Integrity Subhash C. Arya Solutions: Review. Turkiye Klinikleri Jinekoloji Obstetrik 2010; 20(1): 44 50p. 14. Parmley WW. Plagiarism How Serious Is It? Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2000; 36(3): p. 15. Wendy Sutherland-Smith. Plagiarism The Internet and Student Learning: Improving Academic Integrity. Tylor and Franchis Publishers, UK; 2008; 5:102p. 16. Williams D. Plagiarism and Redundancy. Biomaterials 2007; 28: 2535p. 17. Wolpe PR. Reasons Scientists Avoid Thinking about Ethics. Cell 2006; 125(6): p. 18. Körner AM. Guide to Publishing a Scientific Paper, Tylor and Franchis Group, New York; 2008; 10:79p. 19. Chadwick R. Interdisciplinary Science Review 2005; 30: p. OSMJ (2013) 8-15 STM Journals All Rights Reserved Page 15