Area personale

 

Tag

 

Archivio messaggi

 
 << Luglio 2024 >> 
 
LuMaMeGiVeSaDo
 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        
 
 
Creato da: xueji il 27/10/2010
Panel Wants U.S. to Chase 'God Particle'—If There's Money

 

 
« Brain Zaps Improve

Perspective: Put Integrity High on Your To-Do List

Post n°7 pubblicato il 11 Novembre 2010 da xueji
 
Tag: So

Perspective: Put Integrity High on Your To-Do List

For many researchers, integrity is akin to a note on a cluttered reminder board. They know it's important, but other reminders -- to run experiments, apply for grants, write papers, and so on -- take precedence. Serious thinking about research integrity gets put off to another day.

If all researchers set high standards for responsible behavior in research, it might not be so important to pay attention to integrity. Unfortunately, more than a few do not, and the behavior of those who are willing to bend and sometimes deliberately break the rules can impact even the most principled researcher. Consequently, anyone who places integrity at the bottom of a to-do list does so at some personal risk.

When integrity is addressed, the focus is usually on the worst cases of misbehavior, commonly referred to as "research misconduct." The U.S. government defines research misconduct as "fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism." Allegations of research misconduct can end careers and cost institutions time and money. Misconduct cases can also create difficult personal situations. What would you do if you were co-author on a paper that had to be retracted because one of the other co-authors engaged in misconduct? Would you list the paper on your resumé to get credit for legitimate work you did, or would you take it off to avoid being associated with a misconduct case? How would your career be affected if a mentor's or collaborator's grant ended due to a misconduct finding? Research misconduct impacts the careers of both perpetrators and bystanders.

Misconduct is not, however, the first or even the most important test of integrity in scientific practice. More significant by far are the dozens of routine decisions scientists make every day. The relevance to integrity of these small choices may not be apparent. As small decisions, their consequences are not obvious, which makes it easier to justify bending rules and cutting corners: What difference would it make if you described essentially the same research results in more than one publication without proper notification, added a few references in your notes that may or may not actually support your research, or used a few sentences from someone else's methods section to describe what you have done? When the active consideration of integrity is put off to another day, it becomes easier to take the first compromising steps toward irresponsible research practices.

For beginning researchers, decisions about authorship and publication are usually the first to raise questions about proper and improper behavior. What qualifies someone to be an author of a research publication? When is it necessary to credit others for words and work used in your paper? Do different attribution standards apply to different parts of papers, such as the methods section versus the discussion section? Can you reuse your own words without engaging in self-plagiarism? The point of this article is not to provide answers; it is, rather, to emphasize to beginning researchers the importance of studying the standards of research practice in their areas of investigation. Researchers who start research projects without knowing the answers run the risk of making mistakes and getting into difficult situations.

So, here are the first two items that should be on every scientist's integrity to-do list:

1. Fully understand the rules of authorship and credit that apply to your research.

2. Don't begin a research project until everyone involved agrees who will be listed as an author and in what order.

Laboratory management -- especially record keeping -- is another area in which researchers can easily get into trouble. Researchers have a responsibility to be good stewards of research funds, to keep meticulous records of the science done in the lab (i.e., keep complete lab notebooks, whether paper or electronic), and to comply with ethics and other regulations. ( See Box ). Studies suggest that one in three researchers fails to keep proper laboratory records. Irresponsible laboratory practices waste time and funds. They also harm careers when experiments have to be rerun, results cannot be replicated, and papers must be retracted. You can lose your claim to intellectual property if you cannot document when and how something was discovered. Misconduct can go undetected when colleagues fail to keep track of what is going on in their laboratories. Entire university research programs can be suspended if informed consent for a few projects is not properly documented.

To avoid these and other improper laboratory-management practices, two more items should be on every scientist's integrity to-do list:

3. Take note of and understand the rules and regulations that apply to your research. Use them to guide your day-to-day decisions.

4. Develop a system or routine for reviewing how well you are doing in meeting your laboratory-management responsibilities. Integrity is judged by what you do, not what you intended to do.

 
Condividi e segnala Condividi e segnala - permalink - Segnala abuso
 
 
Vai alla Home Page del blog

Cerca in questo Blog

  Trova
 

Ultime visite al Blog

xuejipsicologiaforenseBier_Stubefalco4949erica.gklblumare77armandotestiFataDispettomakkietta1nur_anblickyulyusc.t.intrepido
 

Chi può scrivere sul blog

Solo l'autore può pubblicare messaggi in questo Blog e tutti gli utenti registrati possono pubblicare commenti.
 
RSS (Really simple syndication) Feed Atom
 
 

© Italiaonline S.p.A. 2024Direzione e coordinamento di Libero Acquisition S.á r.l.P. IVA 03970540963