Ethics in Research

Why ethics?

The science itself

Other scientists

The public

The future

Ourselves
Rules & Compliance

Rules for research: Set out by

government, funers, an institution

Compliance: !nvestigators an
institutions follo" the rules that are
set out for them

Researcher #no"s the rules an he or

she is motivate to follo" the rules$
Ethics

Ethics: Stuy of ho" human action

a%ects other humans, or the
ecosystem

&ctions can cause harm

Special responsibilities of researcher

Choose actions that o not cause

un'usti(e harm
Why stuy research ethics
)$ !ncrease #no"lege*sensitivity to
issues concerning responsible
conuct of research
+$ ,a#e ethical an legal choices in the
face of con-icts
.$ &ppreciate accepte practices for
conucting research
Scientifc misconduct or
misconduct in research

Research misconuct is e(ne as
fabrication, falsifcation, or plagiarism
in proposing, performing, or revie"ing
research, or in reporting research
results
&reas of research
misconuct
)/ 0ata ac1uisition, management, sharing, an
o"nership
+/ ,entor*trainee responsibilities
./ 2ublication practices an responsible authorship
3/ 2eer revie"
4/ Collaborative science
5/ 6uman participants
7/ Research involving animals
8/ Con-ict of interest an commitment
http:**ori$hhs$gov*eucation*proucts*montana9roun)*issues$html:cas
e
Who !s !nvolve?

Stuents

Colleagues

!nstructors

2rofessional societies

;rant<ma#ing organi=ations &

government
Why oes misconuct
happen?

2ublish or 2erish 2ressure

0esire to >get ahea?

2ersonal problems

Character issues

Cultural 0i%erences
!entify misconuct

Suspecte an reporte by a
colleague

@ailure to con(rm research results

by o"n lab or others

A post doc changed the numbers in assays in order to

'improve' the data."

"A colleague duplicated results between three

diferent papers but diferently labeled data in each
paper."

"A co-investigator on a large, interdisciplinary grant

application reported that a postdoctoral fellow in his
laboratory falsifed data submitted as preliminary data
in the grant. As principal investigator of the grant, I
submitted supplementary data to correct the
application."

"A colleague used hotoshop to eliminate bac!ground

bands on a western blot to ma!e the data loo! more
specifc than they were."
Aon<publication of ata

0ata that onBt support hypothesis

Trimming of outliers from ataset

&re they non<signi(cant or

signi(cant?
Case: ECpeience, misrepresentation or
falsi(cation?

0r$ Deyos ESenior scientist/ "or#ing on cancer<

ho" tumours metastasi=e:

Three pilot Epreliminary/ eCperiments have sho"n

positive results consistent "ith hypothesis of a
geneBs role, but none of these stuies is
publishable$
)$ !nvestigators "ere not bline to the origins
of the samples for ata collection an
analyses
+$ Ao ae1uate controls
.$ The free=er tha"e resulting in some sample
egraation$

6o"ever, all three pilot eCperiments "ere

consistent "ith a clear con(rmation of the
hypothesis$

Fase on these results, a e(nitive eCperiment

"as esigne an carrie out$ 5 months to
complete the eCperiment, +G mice for each ata
point an eCpensive
Case

On completion of the (nal assays, 0r$ Deyos

learne that labels fell of of two samples,
one for a control group an the other for an
eCperimental group$

!f the two samples are omitted from the

analysis, the results 'ust miss reaching the
accepte level of statistical signi(cance
E2HG$G4/$

!f the samples are assigne to control an

eCperimental groups one "ay, the (nal analysis
is also not statistically signifcant an is not
consistent with the previous three
experiments$

6o"ever, if the unlabele samples are applie

in the opposite "ay, the (nal analysis is
statistically signifcant an consistent with
the pilot studies$
Case
0r$ Deyos is trying to ecie among the
follo"ing courses of action$
)$ Repeat the eCperiment Eat a cost of
approCimately 5 months, .GG animals,
an I3G,GGG/$
+$ &ttempt to publish the (nings omitting
the 1uestionable samples$
.$ &ssign the t"o samples to their li#ely
groups an publish the statistically
signi(cant an convincing results$
Case
)$ Repeat the eCperiment Eat a cost of
approCimately 5 months, .GG animals, an
I3G,GGG/$
.
Ethically permitte an ethically encourage
approach
.
@uners i not buget for repeat of the
eCperiment
Options:
a$ Ta#e I3G,GGG alreay approve by the funing
agency to support a post<octoral stuent an
use that money to cover the aitional
eCperiment$
b$ &pply for other funing to repeat the
eCperiment$ !n the proposal, 0r$ Deyos eCplains
that the results are currently 'ust shy of
statistical signi(cance, but oes not give etails
about the earlier problems$
c$ ECplain the problems that have occurre to the
funers an re1uest aitional funs to support
the testing re1uire for statistical signi(cance$
Case
)$ Repeat the eCperiment Eat a cost of
approCimately 5 months, .GG animals, an
I3G,GGG/$
.
Ethically permitte an ethically encourage
approach
.
@uners i not buget for repeat of the
eCperiment
Options:
a$ Ta#e I3G,GGG alreay approve by the funing
agency to support a post<octoral stuent an
use that money to cover the aitional
eCperiment$

!llegal but nor research misconuct

Jiolates contractual terms

Case
)$ Repeat the eCperiment Eat a cost of
approCimately 5 months, .GG animals, an
I3G,GGG/$
.
Ethically permitte an ethically encourage
approach
.
@uners i not buget for repeat of the
eCperiment
Options:
b$ &pply for other funing to repeat the eCperiment$
!n the proposal, 0r$ Deyos eCplains that the
results are currently 'ust shy of statistical
signi(cance, but oes not give etails about the
earlier problems$
.
Ethically permitte
.
Results he currently has are ambiguous, not
iscon(rming, so can ecie ho" much to
reveal to funer
Case
)$ Repeat the eCperiment Eat a cost of
approCimately 5 months, .GG animals, an
I3G,GGG/$
.
Ethically permitte an ethically encourage
approach
.
@uners i not buget for repeat of the
eCperiment
Options:
c$ ECplain the problems that have occurre to the
funers an re1uest aitional funs to support
the testing re1uire for statistical signi(cance$
.
Ethically permitte
.
&itional funs may be re1ueste from the
funer "ith eCplicit escription of ho" those
funs "oul be use an "hy aitional funs
are neee$
Case
0r$ Deyos is trying to ecie among the
follo"ing courses of action$
+$ &ttempt to publish the (nings omitting
the 1uestionable samples$

Ethically permitte

Aot ieal, but 0r$ Deyos is meeting role<

relate<responsibilities by presenting the
results of the eCperiment in an accurate,
reproucible "ay, even if the results "ere
less than one "oul have hope$

&lthough 0r$ Deyos "oul be ethically an

legally re1uire to report iscon(rming
ata, these results are ambiguous, not
iscon(rming$
Case
0r$ Deyos is trying to ecie among the
follo"ing courses of action$
.$ &ssign the t"o samples to their li#ely
groups an publish the statistically
signi(cant an convincing results$

Research misconuct, speci(cally,

fabrication$ &ssigning the samples as one
hopes they belong is e1uivalent to ma#ing
up ata or results$

Degally an ethically prohibite

@alsi(cation since it inclues changing or

omitting ata or results such that the
research is not accurately reporte$
Case
When another scientist comes to #no"
about this:
)$ 0onKt pursue it$ Lou have enough to o
"ithout getting caught up in a
controversy li#e this$
+$ 6ave a iscussion "ith 0r$ Deyos an
attempt to argue for another alternative$
.$ 0iscuss situation "ith stuents an other
colleagues, eCplaining the problems "ith
0r$ DeyosK approach$
3$ Report the situation to epartment chair,
ean, or other institutional oMcer$
Case
When another scientist comes to #no"
about this:
)$ 0onKt pursue it$ Lou have enough to o
"ithout getting caught up in a
controversy li#e this$
.
Ethically prohibite but not illegal as it is
a violation of the researcherKs role as an
institutional agent
+$ 6ave a iscussion "ith 0r$ Deyos an
attempt to argue for another alternative$
.
Ethically ieal, may provie course
correction but protect "histleblo"er
Case
When another scientist comes to #no"
about this:
.$ 0iscuss situation "ith stuents an other
colleagues, eCplaining the problems "ith
0r$ DeyosK approach$

Ethically prohibite$ 0iscuss "ith 0r$

Devos

Con(entiality of 0r$ Devos violate

3$ Report the situation to epartment chair,
ean, or other institutional oMcer$

Ethically permitte an may become

ethically an legally re1uire if iscussion
"ith 0r$ Devos oes not yiel results
&reas of misconuct
1. Plagiarismusing the ideas, writings,
and drawings of others as your own
2. Fabrication and falsificationmaking up
or altering data
. Faulty data!gathering procedures
". Poor data storage and retention
#. $isleading authorshipwho should be
an author%
@abrication*falsi(cation

&ing ne" sub'ects of

eCperimentation

Cite literature

!nterpretation of "hat another author

says

Rely on primary an original sources

of ata
@aulty ata gathering
)$ 0ata collection from participants "ho
o not meet conitions of research
+$ ,alfunctioning e1uipment
.$ !nappropriate treatment of sub'ects
3$ Recoring ata incorrectly
2oor ata storage

Neep ata for upto . years

&. $isleading authorshipwho should be an
author%

'echnicians do not necessarily become

(oint authors

)uthorship should in*ol*e only those who

contribute directly

+iscuss authorship before the pro(ect

,entoring

,entors have the responsibility to ensure

that all trainees Epost<ocs, gra stuents,
unergras/ are a"are of the responsible
conuct of research

0e(ne the Relationship

Role of Trainee

2ublication*&uthorship

Serving as 2! or Co<2!

Obligation to report

;oo faith report

Mentor/Trainee
Relationships

,entors: 0irectly involve in professional

evelopment of a research trainee$

Research trainees: 0epenent on their lab

irectors for everything from money to pay the
rent to approval for their thesis pro'ects$

Dab irectors: 0epenent upon their trainees to

carry out their research plans, #eep appropriate
recors, prouce an leave the ocumentation
necessary for publication an other use of the
trainerKs ocumente "or# an results$

2otential for abuse an eCploitation by both$

Mentor/Trainee Relationships: thical issues
)$ ,entor too focuse on o"n research agena$ &re
trainees having appropriate eucational
eCperiences?
+$ Research problems seem to be istribute in an
unfair or arbitrary manner "ithin research group
.$ ;roun rules are not articulate for
communicating an sharing ata
3$ 2olicies are not clear for assignment of creit an
authorship
4$ ,entor fails to follo" funer, institutional or
professional eCpectations or other"ise acts in
ethically prohibite or ethically 1uestionable "ays
in carrying out the "or#
5$ ,entor an trainee isagree regaring o"nership
of ata, timing of presentation or publication, or
about the accuracy or interpretation of "hat is to
be reporte$
Solutions
)$ Choosing mentor: ,utual professional interest an compatibility of
"or# styles
+$ ,entor is able to articulate eCpectations, is irect, an has clear
an consistent bounaries in relationships "ith suborinates
.$ ,entor fosters an environment of irect communication amongst
all members, not tolerate gossip nor tal#ing behin othersK bac#sO
3$ 6elps trainees iscover an evelop their o"n interests$ The
mentor loo#s for opportunities to merge the traineeKs ieas "ith
the labKs research ob'ectives
4$ !mportance of ethics communicate to trainees
5$ Trainee unerstans organi=ational structure of the lab, the
epartment an the research institution so that iniviual roles are
sensible an channels for eCpressing concerns are evient
!ata Retention and Reporting
"uidelines for research process and
reporting:
)/ 0ocumentation of on<going research
+/ Pse statistics properly an appropriate to the
eCperiment, not that most li#ely to provie the
outcome one "ishes
./ Repeat eCperiments until the results are
consistentO 'usti(cation for ropping outlier ata
points
3/ &ccurately recor an report ata$ 0onKt hie
negative results
4/ ;ive creit appropriately
#ublication practices and responsible
authorship
!nclue an author if:

6e or she can be appropriately praise or

blame for a signi(cant segment of inclue
material

0epening on compleCity of collaboration that

prouce the report, authorship may inicate
responsibility for a isciplinary<speci(c aspect
rather than for the "hole piece

>& general rule is that an author must have

participate suMciently in the "or# to ta#e
responsibility for its content an vouch for its
valiity?
$ollaboration and $ompetition

Each ne" iscovery is built upon the bloc#s of

earlier iscoveries

Each researcher is epenent upon the "or# of

researchers "ho have come before$

!nterisciplinary "or#

Competitions bet"een labs for funing

Con-ict of interest vs con-ict of commitment

Researcher has to share ata "ith other researchers

an to be the (rst to publish accurate results$

6ighly competitive atmosphere "ithin a

research group can be lin#e "ith erosion of
trust "ithin the group
Case

0r$ Smith Eresearcher/

Qohn: ;rauate stuent, an lab

irector$

Ao concrete results as eCpecte

Wor# "as to be presente at

conference, thesis submitte by
stuent

,aterials from another complete

eCperiment given to Qohn, (nish
manuscript for goo publication
Case

&ccept

;ift of authorship

2ublication in conference

Ethically & legally prohibite

@abrication by 0r$ Smith as results are "hat

they "ere eCpecte to be

2lagiarism by Qohn

0ecline

Ethical

0ecline
)$ 0r$ Smith turne the pro'ect over to
a ne" stuent$
.
mentor<trainee relationship gone
a"ry
.
Qohn shoul have been tol of
possibility before beginning "or#
.
0r$ SmithBs responsibility to Qohn

0r$ Smith iscusse QohnKs refusal

"ith a colleague$

Trying for replication of results by

Qohn
%uman participation in research
The &uremberg $ode evelope in response to eCperiments
conucte on concentration camp prisoners by ;erman octors
uring Worl War !!$ The Auremberg Coe establishe the right
an the importance of voluntary participation an informe
consent$
The !eclaration of %elsin'i is a statement of
recommenations from the Worl ,eical &ssociation in )R53
Eamene in )R74, )R8., )R8R, an )RR5/$ The eclaration
establishe these principles: human research shoul be base
on successful laboratory an animal eCperimentation an shoul
have importance that out"eighs the ris#O the investigators must
be competent for the intene tas#O participants shoul provie
informe consentO protocols shoul be revie"e by an eCternal
boy to avoi investigator bias$
http:**ori$hhs$gov*eucation*proucts*montana9roun)*human$html
6uman participant in research
E)/ ata through intervention or interaction or
E+/ ienti(able private information

!f boily materials are collecte for

research purposes

!f iagnostic specimens are retaine for

research purposes

!f private information is compile

incluing meical recors, 0A& samples,
or cell lines
6uman participant in research
Social an behavioural sciences:
E)/ientifying information is recore
an
E+/isclosure coul place the
participant at ris# for criminal or
civil liability or amage to their
(nancial staning, employability or
reputation, or if the research
involves a vulnerable population
!nforme consent*privacy*con(entiality
)/ Whether they "ish to participate in the stuy or
not
+/ 2articipants shoul unerstan, from their
perspective Enot from researcherKs/, "hat "ill
actually happen to them through their inclusion
in the stuy
./ &ll ris#s an any bene(ts
3/ What follo"s from a ecision not to participate
Eimportant to people "ho are ill an choosing to
participate in an eCperimental rug stuy/
4/ What "ill happen to any ata or information
collecte from them
!f someone "ere to as# participants "hat they are
oing an "hy an "hat the conitions are
regaring their participation, they shoul be able
to ans"er those 1uestions
$ompensation and $oercion

Compensation: 2ayment or the

potential of monetary gain for human
participants in research

Coercion: Compel participation by

real or perceive force, authority or
intimiation

Compensation can be coercive if it is

li#ely to encourage a participant to
ta#e ris#s that he or she "oul not
ta#e if it "ere not for the money
2rivacy

Right of an iniviual to control "hat other people

#no" about them

Ao person can completely control "hat other

people #no" about him or her if that #no"lege is
base on the iniviualKs public speech, actions, or
location

!nforme consent is not re1uire for research

pro'ects that monitor unienti(e sub'ectsK public
behavior

When information that iniviuals "oul normally

control is collecte, informe consent inicates
that the participant has voluntarily chosen to
isclose certain information to investigators
Con(entiality
Care researchers eChibit to"ar ata collecte from
iniviuals

Research culture base on respect for human

participants

0isclosure of information "ithin research team on

a nee<to<#no" basis

&ll team members sign con(entiality agreements

Pse coes or encryption for ientifying information

Separate forms containing ientifying information

from instruments containing ata

Electronic an paper (les containing ientifying

information shoul be store in an area a"ay from
public access an shoul be loc#e
2articipants

6o" to get help if they su%er a

research<relate in'ury

Who to contact "ith 1uestions uring

or after the stuy

Consent is an on<going process, may

"ithra" at any time "ithout penalty