Discussion Tools

Case studies.

  • Current Events
  • Email Discussion
  • Guest Faculty
  • Journal Publications
  • Question-based Lectures
  • Role Playing
  • Student Teaching
  • appropriate selection of case(s) (topic, relevance, length, complexity)
  • method of case presentation (verbal, printed, before or during discussion)
  • format for case discussion (Email or Internet-based, small group, large group)
  • leadership of case discussion (choice of discussion leader, roles and responsibilities for discussion leader)
  • outcomes for case discussion (answers to specific questions, answers to general questions, written or verbal summaries)

Leading Case Discussions

  • Reading the case aloud.
  • Defining, and re-defining as needed, the questions to be answered.
  • Encouraging discussion that is "on topic".
  • Discouraging discussion that is "off topic".
  • Keeping the pace of discussion appropriate to the time available.
  • Eliciting contributions from all members of the discussion group.
  • Summarizing both majority and minority opinions at the end of the discussion.

How should cases be analyzed?

  • Who are the affected parties (individuals, institutions, a field, society) in this situation?
  • What interest(s) (material, financial, ethical, other) does each party have in the situation? Which interests are in conflict?
  • Were the actions taken by each of the affected parties acceptable (ethical, legal, moral, or common sense)? If not, are there circumstances under which those actions would have been acceptable? Who should impose what sanction(s)?
  • What other courses of action are open to each of the affected parties? What is the likely outcome of each course of action?
  • For each party involved, what course of action would you take, and why?
  • What actions could have been taken to avoid the conflict?

Is there a right answer?

  • Bebeau MJ with Pimple KD, Muskavitch KMT, Borden SL, Smith DH (1995): Moral Reasoning in Scientific Research: Cases for Teaching and Assessment. Indiana University. http://poynter.indiana.edu/mr/mr-main.shtml
  • Elliott D, Stern JE (1997): Research Ethics - A Reader. University Press of New England, Hanover, NH.
  • Cases and Scenarios, Online Ethics Center for Engineering and Research, National Academy of Engineering http://www.onlineethics.org/Resources/Cases.aspx
  • Foran J (2002): Case Method Website: Teaching the Case Method: Materials for a New Pedagogy, University of California, Santa Barbara. http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/projects/casemethod
  • Herreid CF: National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science, State University of New York at Buffalo. This comprehensive site offers methodology, a case study collection, case study teachers, workshops, and links to additional resources. http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/projects/cases/case.html
  • Korenman SG, Shipp AC (1994): Teaching the Responsible Conduct of Research through a Case Study Approach: A Handbook for Instructors. Association of American Medical Colleges, Washington, DC.
  • Macrina FL (2005): Scientific Integrity: An Introductory Text with Cases. 3rd edition, American Society for Microbiology Press, Washington, DC.
  • National Academy of Sciences (1995): On Being a Scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research. 2nd Edition. Publication from the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. National Academy Press, Washington DC. http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=4917
  • National Academy of Sciences (2009): On Being a Scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research. 3rd Edition. Publication from the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine. National Academy Press, Washington DC. http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12192
  • Penslar RL, ed. (1995): Research Ethics: Cases and Materials. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN.
  • Pimple KD (2002): Using Small Group Assignments in Teaching Research Ethics, The Poynter Center, Indiana University, Bloomington. http://poynter.indiana.edu/tre/kdp-groups.pdf
  • Schrag B, ed. (1996): Research Ethics: Cases and Commentaries, Volumes 1-6, Association for Practical and Professional Ethics, Bloomington, Indiana. http://www.onlineethics.org/cms/15333.aspx
  • Terms of Use
  • Site Feedback

McCombs School of Business

  • Español ( Spanish )

Videos Concepts Unwrapped View All 36 short illustrated videos explain behavioral ethics concepts and basic ethics principles. Concepts Unwrapped: Sports Edition View All 10 short videos introduce athletes to behavioral ethics concepts. Ethics Defined (Glossary) View All 58 animated videos - 1 to 2 minutes each - define key ethics terms and concepts. Ethics in Focus View All One-of-a-kind videos highlight the ethical aspects of current and historical subjects. Giving Voice To Values View All Eight short videos present the 7 principles of values-driven leadership from Gentile's Giving Voice to Values. In It To Win View All A documentary and six short videos reveal the behavioral ethics biases in super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff's story. Scandals Illustrated View All 30 videos - one minute each - introduce newsworthy scandals with ethical insights and case studies. Video Series

Case Studies UT Star Icon

Case Studies

More than 70 cases pair ethics concepts with real world situations. From journalism, performing arts, and scientific research to sports, law, and business, these case studies explore current and historic ethical dilemmas, their motivating biases, and their consequences. Each case includes discussion questions, related videos, and a bibliography.

A Million Little Pieces

A Million Little Pieces

James Frey’s popular memoir stirred controversy and media attention after it was revealed to contain numerous exaggerations and fabrications.

Abramoff: Lobbying Congress

Abramoff: Lobbying Congress

Super-lobbyist Abramoff was caught in a scheme to lobby against his own clients. Was a corrupt individual or a corrupt system – or both – to blame?

Apple Suppliers & Labor Practices

Apple Suppliers & Labor Practices

Is tech company Apple, Inc. ethically obligated to oversee the questionable working conditions of other companies further down their supply chain?

Approaching the Presidency: Roosevelt & Taft

Approaching the Presidency: Roosevelt & Taft

Some presidents view their responsibilities in strictly legal terms, others according to duty. Roosevelt and Taft took two extreme approaches.

Appropriating “Hope”

Appropriating “Hope”

Fairey’s portrait of Barack Obama raised debate over the extent to which an artist can use and modify another’s artistic work, yet still call it one’s own.

Arctic Offshore Drilling

Arctic Offshore Drilling

Competing groups frame the debate over oil drilling off Alaska’s coast in varying ways depending on their environmental and economic interests.

Banning Burkas: Freedom or Discrimination?

Banning Burkas: Freedom or Discrimination?

The French law banning women from wearing burkas in public sparked debate about discrimination and freedom of religion.

Birthing Vaccine Skepticism

Birthing Vaccine Skepticism

Wakefield published an article riddled with inaccuracies and conflicts of interest that created significant vaccine hesitancy regarding the MMR vaccine.

Blurred Lines of Copyright

Blurred Lines of Copyright

Marvin Gaye’s Estate won a lawsuit against Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams for the hit song “Blurred Lines,” which had a similar feel to one of his songs.

Bullfighting: Art or Not?

Bullfighting: Art or Not?

Bullfighting has been a prominent cultural and artistic event for centuries, but in recent decades it has faced increasing criticism for animal rights’ abuse.

Buying Green: Consumer Behavior

Buying Green: Consumer Behavior

Do purchasing green products, such as organic foods and electric cars, give consumers the moral license to indulge in unethical behavior?

Cadavers in Car Safety Research

Cadavers in Car Safety Research

Engineers at Heidelberg University insist that the use of human cadavers in car safety research is ethical because their research can save lives.

Cardinals’ Computer Hacking

Cardinals’ Computer Hacking

St. Louis Cardinals scouting director Chris Correa hacked into the Houston Astros’ webmail system, leading to legal repercussions and a lifetime ban from MLB.

Cheating: Atlanta’s School Scandal

Cheating: Atlanta’s School Scandal

Teachers and administrators at Parks Middle School adjust struggling students’ test scores in an effort to save their school from closure.

Cheating: Sign-Stealing in MLB

Cheating: Sign-Stealing in MLB

The Houston Astros’ sign-stealing scheme rocked the baseball world, leading to a game-changing MLB investigation and fallout.

Cheating: UNC’s Academic Fraud

Cheating: UNC’s Academic Fraud

UNC’s academic fraud scandal uncovered an 18-year scheme of unchecked coursework and fraudulent classes that enabled student-athletes to play sports.

Cheney v. U.S. District Court

Cheney v. U.S. District Court

A controversial case focuses on Justice Scalia’s personal friendship with Vice President Cheney and the possible conflict of interest it poses to the case.

Christina Fallin: “Appropriate Culturation?”

Christina Fallin: “Appropriate Culturation?”

After Fallin posted a picture of herself wearing a Plain’s headdress on social media, uproar emerged over cultural appropriation and Fallin’s intentions.

Climate Change & the Paris Deal

Climate Change & the Paris Deal

While climate change poses many abstract problems, the actions (or inactions) of today’s populations will have tangible effects on future generations.

Cover-Up on Campus

Cover-Up on Campus

While the Baylor University football team was winning on the field, university officials failed to take action when allegations of sexual assault by student athletes emerged.

Covering Female Athletes

Covering Female Athletes

Sports Illustrated stirs controversy when their cover photo of an Olympic skier seems to focus more on her physical appearance than her athletic abilities.

Covering Yourself? Journalists and the Bowl Championship

Covering Yourself? Journalists and the Bowl Championship

Can news outlets covering the Bowl Championship Series fairly report sports news if their own polls were used to create the news?

Cyber Harassment

Cyber Harassment

After a student defames a middle school teacher on social media, the teacher confronts the student in class and posts a video of the confrontation online.

Defending Freedom of Tweets?

Defending Freedom of Tweets?

Running back Rashard Mendenhall receives backlash from fans after criticizing the celebration of the assassination of Osama Bin Laden in a tweet.

Dennis Kozlowski: Living Large

Dennis Kozlowski: Living Large

Dennis Kozlowski was an effective leader for Tyco in his first few years as CEO, but eventually faced criminal charges over his use of company assets.

Digital Downloads

Digital Downloads

File-sharing program Napster sparked debate over the legal and ethical dimensions of downloading unauthorized copies of copyrighted music.

Dr. V’s Magical Putter

Dr. V’s Magical Putter

Journalist Caleb Hannan outed Dr. V as a trans woman, sparking debate over the ethics of Hannan’s reporting, as well its role in Dr. V’s suicide.

East Germany’s Doping Machine

East Germany’s Doping Machine

From 1968 to the late 1980s, East Germany (GDR) doped some 9,000 athletes to gain success in international athletic competitions despite being aware of the unfortunate side effects.

Ebola & American Intervention

Ebola & American Intervention

Did the dispatch of U.S. military units to Liberia to aid in humanitarian relief during the Ebola epidemic help or hinder the process?

Edward Snowden: Traitor or Hero?

Edward Snowden: Traitor or Hero?

Was Edward Snowden’s release of confidential government documents ethically justifiable?

Ethical Pitfalls in Action

Ethical Pitfalls in Action

Why do good people do bad things? Behavioral ethics is the science of moral decision-making, which explores why and how people make the ethical (and unethical) decisions that they do.

Ethical Use of Home DNA Testing

Ethical Use of Home DNA Testing

The rising popularity of at-home DNA testing kits raises questions about privacy and consumer rights.

Flying the Confederate Flag

Flying the Confederate Flag

A heated debate ensues over whether or not the Confederate flag should be removed from the South Carolina State House grounds.

Freedom of Speech on Campus

Freedom of Speech on Campus

In the wake of racially motivated offenses, student protests sparked debate over the roles of free speech, deliberation, and tolerance on campus.

Freedom vs. Duty in Clinical Social Work

Freedom vs. Duty in Clinical Social Work

What should social workers do when their personal values come in conflict with the clients they are meant to serve?

Full Disclosure: Manipulating Donors

Full Disclosure: Manipulating Donors

When an intern witnesses a donor making a large gift to a non-profit organization under misleading circumstances, she struggles with what to do.

Gaming the System: The VA Scandal

Gaming the System: The VA Scandal

The Veterans Administration’s incentives were meant to spur more efficient and productive healthcare, but not all administrators complied as intended.

German Police Battalion 101

German Police Battalion 101

During the Holocaust, ordinary Germans became willing killers even though they could have opted out from murdering their Jewish neighbors.

Head Injuries & American Football

Head Injuries & American Football

Many studies have linked traumatic brain injuries and related conditions to American football, creating controversy around the safety of the sport.

Head Injuries & the NFL

Head Injuries & the NFL

American football is a rough and dangerous game and its impact on the players’ brain health has sparked a hotly contested debate.

Healthcare Obligations: Personal vs. Institutional

Healthcare Obligations: Personal vs. Institutional

A medical doctor must make a difficult decision when informing patients of the effectiveness of flu shots while upholding institutional recommendations.

High Stakes Testing

High Stakes Testing

In the wake of the No Child Left Behind Act, parents, teachers, and school administrators take different positions on how to assess student achievement.

In-FUR-mercials: Advertising & Adoption

In-FUR-mercials: Advertising & Adoption

When the Lied Animal Shelter faces a spike in animal intake, an advertising agency uses its moral imagination to increase pet adoptions.

Krogh & the Watergate Scandal

Krogh & the Watergate Scandal

Egil Krogh was a young lawyer working for the Nixon Administration whose ethics faded from view when asked to play a part in the Watergate break-in.

Limbaugh on Drug Addiction

Limbaugh on Drug Addiction

Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh argued that drug abuse was a choice, not a disease. He later became addicted to painkillers.

LochteGate

U.S. Olympic swimmer Ryan Lochte’s “over-exaggeration” of an incident at the 2016 Rio Olympics led to very real consequences.

Meet Me at Starbucks

Meet Me at Starbucks

Two black men were arrested after an employee called the police on them, prompting Starbucks to implement “racial-bias” training across all its stores.

Myanmar Amber

Myanmar Amber

Buying amber could potentially fund an ethnic civil war, but refraining allows collectors to acquire important specimens that could be used for research.

Negotiating Bankruptcy

Negotiating Bankruptcy

Bankruptcy lawyer Gellene successfully represented a mining company during a major reorganization, but failed to disclose potential conflicts of interest.

Pao & Gender Bias

Pao & Gender Bias

Ellen Pao stirred debate in the venture capital and tech industries when she filed a lawsuit against her employer on grounds of gender discrimination.

Pardoning Nixon

Pardoning Nixon

One month after Richard Nixon resigned from the presidency, Gerald Ford made the controversial decision to issue Nixon a full pardon.

Patient Autonomy & Informed Consent

Patient Autonomy & Informed Consent

Nursing staff and family members struggle with informed consent when taking care of a patient who has been deemed legally incompetent.

Prenatal Diagnosis & Parental Choice

Prenatal Diagnosis & Parental Choice

Debate has emerged over the ethics of prenatal diagnosis and reproductive freedom in instances where testing has revealed genetic abnormalities.

Reporting on Robin Williams

Reporting on Robin Williams

After Robin Williams took his own life, news media covered the story in great detail, leading many to argue that such reporting violated the family’s privacy.

Responding to Child Migration

Responding to Child Migration

An influx of children migrants posed logistical and ethical dilemmas for U.S. authorities while intensifying ongoing debate about immigration.

Retracting Research: The Case of Chandok v. Klessig

Retracting Research: The Case of Chandok v. Klessig

A researcher makes the difficult decision to retract a published, peer-reviewed article after the original research results cannot be reproduced.

Sacking Social Media in College Sports

Sacking Social Media in College Sports

In the wake of questionable social media use by college athletes, the head coach at University of South Carolina bans his players from using Twitter.

Selling Enron

Selling Enron

Following the deregulation of electricity markets in California, private energy company Enron profited greatly, but at a dire cost.

Snyder v. Phelps

Snyder v. Phelps

Freedom of speech was put on trial in a case involving the Westboro Baptist Church and their protesting at the funeral of U.S. Marine Matthew Snyder.

Something Fishy at the Paralympics

Something Fishy at the Paralympics

Rampant cheating has plagued the Paralympics over the years, compromising the credibility and sportsmanship of Paralympian athletes.

Sports Blogs: The Wild West of Sports Journalism?

Sports Blogs: The Wild West of Sports Journalism?

Deadspin pays an anonymous source for information related to NFL star Brett Favre, sparking debate over the ethics of “checkbook journalism.”

Stangl & the Holocaust

Stangl & the Holocaust

Franz Stangl was the most effective Nazi administrator in Poland, killing nearly one million Jews at Treblinka, but he claimed he was simply following orders.

Teaching Blackface: A Lesson on Stereotypes

Teaching Blackface: A Lesson on Stereotypes

A teacher was put on leave for showing a blackface video during a lesson on racial segregation, sparking discussion over how to teach about stereotypes.

The Astros’ Sign-Stealing Scandal

The Astros’ Sign-Stealing Scandal

The Houston Astros rode a wave of success, culminating in a World Series win, but it all came crashing down when their sign-stealing scheme was revealed.

The Central Park Five

The Central Park Five

Despite the indisputable and overwhelming evidence of the innocence of the Central Park Five, some involved in the case refuse to believe it.

The CIA Leak

The CIA Leak

Legal and political fallout follows from the leak of classified information that led to the identification of CIA agent Valerie Plame.

The Collapse of Barings Bank

The Collapse of Barings Bank

When faced with growing losses, investment banker Nick Leeson took big risks in an attempt to get out from under the losses. He lost.

The Costco Model

The Costco Model

How can companies promote positive treatment of employees and benefit from leading with the best practices? Costco offers a model.

The FBI & Apple Security vs. Privacy

The FBI & Apple Security vs. Privacy

How can tech companies and government organizations strike a balance between maintaining national security and protecting user privacy?

The Miss Saigon Controversy

The Miss Saigon Controversy

When a white actor was cast for the half-French, half-Vietnamese character in the Broadway production of Miss Saigon , debate ensued.

The Sandusky Scandal

The Sandusky Scandal

Following the conviction of assistant coach Jerry Sandusky for sexual abuse, debate continues on how much university officials and head coach Joe Paterno knew of the crimes.

The Varsity Blues Scandal

The Varsity Blues Scandal

A college admissions prep advisor told wealthy parents that while there were front doors into universities and back doors, he had created a side door that was worth exploring.

Therac-25

Providing radiation therapy to cancer patients, Therac-25 had malfunctions that resulted in 6 deaths. Who is accountable when technology causes harm?

Welfare Reform

Welfare Reform

The Welfare Reform Act changed how welfare operated, intensifying debate over the government’s role in supporting the poor through direct aid.

Wells Fargo and Moral Emotions

Wells Fargo and Moral Emotions

In a settlement with regulators, Wells Fargo Bank admitted that it had created as many as two million accounts for customers without their permission.

Stay Informed

Support our work.

Annual Review of Ethics Case Studies

What are research ethics cases.

For additional information, please visit Resources for Research Ethics Education

Research Ethics Cases are a tool for discussing scientific integrity. Cases are designed to confront the readers with a specific problem that does not lend itself to easy answers. By providing a focus for discussion, cases help staff involved in research to define or refine their own standards, to appreciate alternative approaches to identifying and resolving ethical problems, and to develop skills for dealing with hard problems on their own.

Research Ethics Cases for Use by the NIH Community

  • Theme 23 – Authorship, Collaborations, and Mentoring (2023)
  • Theme 22 – Use of Human Biospecimens and Informed Consent (2022)
  • Theme 21 – Science Under Pressure (2021)
  • Theme 20 – Data, Project and Lab Management, and Communication (2020)
  • Theme 19 – Civility, Harassment and Inappropriate Conduct (2019)
  • Theme 18 – Implicit and Explicit Biases in the Research Setting (2018)
  • Theme 17 – Socially Responsible Science (2017)
  • Theme 16 – Research Reproducibility (2016)
  • Theme 15 – Authorship and Collaborative Science (2015)
  • Theme 14 – Differentiating Between Honest Discourse and Research Misconduct and Introduction to Enhancing Reproducibility (2014)
  • Theme 13 – Data Management, Whistleblowers, and Nepotism (2013)
  • Theme 12 – Mentoring (2012)
  • Theme 11 – Authorship (2011)
  • Theme 10 – Science and Social Responsibility, continued (2010)
  • Theme 9 – Science and Social Responsibility - Dual Use Research (2009)
  • Theme 8 – Borrowing - Is It Plagiarism? (2008)
  • Theme 7 – Data Management and Scientific Misconduct (2007)
  • Theme 6 – Ethical Ambiguities (2006)
  • Theme 5 – Data Management (2005)
  • Theme 4 – Collaborative Science (2004)
  • Theme 3 – Mentoring (2003)
  • Theme 2 – Authorship (2002)
  • Theme 1 – Scientific Misconduct (2001)

For Facilitators Leading Case Discussion

For the sake of time and clarity of purpose, it is essential that one individual have responsibility for leading the group discussion. As a minimum, this responsibility should include:

  • Reading the case aloud.
  • Defining, and re-defining as needed, the questions to be answered.
  • Encouraging discussion that is “on topic”.
  • Discouraging discussion that is “off topic”.
  • Keeping the pace of discussion appropriate to the time available.
  • Eliciting contributions from all members of the discussion group.
  • Summarizing both majority and minority opinions at the end of the discussion.

How Should Cases be Analyzed?

Many of the skills necessary to analyze case studies can become tools for responding to real world problems. Cases, like the real world, contain uncertainties and ambiguities. Readers are encouraged to identify key issues, make assumptions as needed, and articulate options for resolution. In addition to the specific questions accompanying each case, readers should consider the following questions:

  • Who are the affected parties (individuals, institutions, a field, society) in this situation?
  • What interest(s) (material, financial, ethical, other) does each party have in the situation? Which interests are in conflict?
  • Were the actions taken by each of the affected parties acceptable (ethical, legal, moral, or common sense)? If not, are there circumstances under which those actions would have been acceptable? Who should impose what sanction(s)?
  • What other courses of action are open to each of the affected parties? What is the likely outcome of each course of action?
  • For each party involved, what course of action would you take, and why?
  • What actions could have been taken to avoid the conflict?

Is There a Right Answer?

Acceptable solutions.

Most problems will have several acceptable solutions or answers, but it will not always be the case that a perfect solution can be found. At times, even the best solution will still have some unsatisfactory consequences.

Unacceptable Solutions

While more than one acceptable solution may be possible, not all solutions are acceptable. For example, obvious violations of specific rules and regulations or of generally accepted standards of conduct would typically be unacceptable. However, it is also plausible that blind adherence to accepted rules or standards would sometimes be an unacceptable course of action.

Ethical Decision-Making

It should be noted that ethical decision-making is a process rather than a specific correct answer. In this sense, unethical behavior is defined by a failure to engage in the process of ethical decision-making. It is always unacceptable to have made no reasonable attempt to define a consistent and defensible basis for conduct.

This page was last updated on Friday, July 7, 2023

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

  • Knowledge Base

Methodology

  • Ethical Considerations in Research | Types & Examples

Ethical Considerations in Research | Types & Examples

Published on October 18, 2021 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on June 22, 2023.

Ethical considerations in research are a set of principles that guide your research designs and practices. Scientists and researchers must always adhere to a certain code of conduct when collecting data from people.

The goals of human research often include understanding real-life phenomena, studying effective treatments, investigating behaviors, and improving lives in other ways. What you decide to research and how you conduct that research involve key ethical considerations.

These considerations work to

  • protect the rights of research participants
  • enhance research validity
  • maintain scientific or academic integrity

Table of contents

Why do research ethics matter, getting ethical approval for your study, types of ethical issues, voluntary participation, informed consent, confidentiality, potential for harm, results communication, examples of ethical failures, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research ethics.

Research ethics matter for scientific integrity, human rights and dignity, and collaboration between science and society. These principles make sure that participation in studies is voluntary, informed, and safe for research subjects.

You’ll balance pursuing important research objectives with using ethical research methods and procedures. It’s always necessary to prevent permanent or excessive harm to participants, whether inadvertent or not.

Defying research ethics will also lower the credibility of your research because it’s hard for others to trust your data if your methods are morally questionable.

Even if a research idea is valuable to society, it doesn’t justify violating the human rights or dignity of your study participants.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Before you start any study involving data collection with people, you’ll submit your research proposal to an institutional review board (IRB) .

An IRB is a committee that checks whether your research aims and research design are ethically acceptable and follow your institution’s code of conduct. They check that your research materials and procedures are up to code.

If successful, you’ll receive IRB approval, and you can begin collecting data according to the approved procedures. If you want to make any changes to your procedures or materials, you’ll need to submit a modification application to the IRB for approval.

If unsuccessful, you may be asked to re-submit with modifications or your research proposal may receive a rejection. To get IRB approval, it’s important to explicitly note how you’ll tackle each of the ethical issues that may arise in your study.

There are several ethical issues you should always pay attention to in your research design, and these issues can overlap with each other.

You’ll usually outline ways you’ll deal with each issue in your research proposal if you plan to collect data from participants.

Voluntary participation means that all research subjects are free to choose to participate without any pressure or coercion.

All participants are able to withdraw from, or leave, the study at any point without feeling an obligation to continue. Your participants don’t need to provide a reason for leaving the study.

It’s important to make it clear to participants that there are no negative consequences or repercussions to their refusal to participate. After all, they’re taking the time to help you in the research process , so you should respect their decisions without trying to change their minds.

Voluntary participation is an ethical principle protected by international law and many scientific codes of conduct.

Take special care to ensure there’s no pressure on participants when you’re working with vulnerable groups of people who may find it hard to stop the study even when they want to.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Informed consent refers to a situation in which all potential participants receive and understand all the information they need to decide whether they want to participate. This includes information about the study’s benefits, risks, funding, and institutional approval.

You make sure to provide all potential participants with all the relevant information about

  • what the study is about
  • the risks and benefits of taking part
  • how long the study will take
  • your supervisor’s contact information and the institution’s approval number

Usually, you’ll provide participants with a text for them to read and ask them if they have any questions. If they agree to participate, they can sign or initial the consent form. Note that this may not be sufficient for informed consent when you work with particularly vulnerable groups of people.

If you’re collecting data from people with low literacy, make sure to verbally explain the consent form to them before they agree to participate.

For participants with very limited English proficiency, you should always translate the study materials or work with an interpreter so they have all the information in their first language.

In research with children, you’ll often need informed permission for their participation from their parents or guardians. Although children cannot give informed consent, it’s best to also ask for their assent (agreement) to participate, depending on their age and maturity level.

Anonymity means that you don’t know who the participants are and you can’t link any individual participant to their data.

You can only guarantee anonymity by not collecting any personally identifying information—for example, names, phone numbers, email addresses, IP addresses, physical characteristics, photos, and videos.

In many cases, it may be impossible to truly anonymize data collection . For example, data collected in person or by phone cannot be considered fully anonymous because some personal identifiers (demographic information or phone numbers) are impossible to hide.

You’ll also need to collect some identifying information if you give your participants the option to withdraw their data at a later stage.

Data pseudonymization is an alternative method where you replace identifying information about participants with pseudonymous, or fake, identifiers. The data can still be linked to participants but it’s harder to do so because you separate personal information from the study data.

Confidentiality means that you know who the participants are, but you remove all identifying information from your report.

All participants have a right to privacy, so you should protect their personal data for as long as you store or use it. Even when you can’t collect data anonymously, you should secure confidentiality whenever you can.

Some research designs aren’t conducive to confidentiality, but it’s important to make all attempts and inform participants of the risks involved.

As a researcher, you have to consider all possible sources of harm to participants. Harm can come in many different forms.

  • Psychological harm: Sensitive questions or tasks may trigger negative emotions such as shame or anxiety.
  • Social harm: Participation can involve social risks, public embarrassment, or stigma.
  • Physical harm: Pain or injury can result from the study procedures.
  • Legal harm: Reporting sensitive data could lead to legal risks or a breach of privacy.

It’s best to consider every possible source of harm in your study as well as concrete ways to mitigate them. Involve your supervisor to discuss steps for harm reduction.

Make sure to disclose all possible risks of harm to participants before the study to get informed consent. If there is a risk of harm, prepare to provide participants with resources or counseling or medical services if needed.

Some of these questions may bring up negative emotions, so you inform participants about the sensitive nature of the survey and assure them that their responses will be confidential.

The way you communicate your research results can sometimes involve ethical issues. Good science communication is honest, reliable, and credible. It’s best to make your results as transparent as possible.

Take steps to actively avoid plagiarism and research misconduct wherever possible.

Plagiarism means submitting others’ works as your own. Although it can be unintentional, copying someone else’s work without proper credit amounts to stealing. It’s an ethical problem in research communication because you may benefit by harming other researchers.

Self-plagiarism is when you republish or re-submit parts of your own papers or reports without properly citing your original work.

This is problematic because you may benefit from presenting your ideas as new and original even though they’ve already been published elsewhere in the past. You may also be infringing on your previous publisher’s copyright, violating an ethical code, or wasting time and resources by doing so.

In extreme cases of self-plagiarism, entire datasets or papers are sometimes duplicated. These are major ethical violations because they can skew research findings if taken as original data.

You notice that two published studies have similar characteristics even though they are from different years. Their sample sizes, locations, treatments, and results are highly similar, and the studies share one author in common.

Research misconduct

Research misconduct means making up or falsifying data, manipulating data analyses, or misrepresenting results in research reports. It’s a form of academic fraud.

These actions are committed intentionally and can have serious consequences; research misconduct is not a simple mistake or a point of disagreement about data analyses.

Research misconduct is a serious ethical issue because it can undermine academic integrity and institutional credibility. It leads to a waste of funding and resources that could have been used for alternative research.

Later investigations revealed that they fabricated and manipulated their data to show a nonexistent link between vaccines and autism. Wakefield also neglected to disclose important conflicts of interest, and his medical license was taken away.

This fraudulent work sparked vaccine hesitancy among parents and caregivers. The rate of MMR vaccinations in children fell sharply, and measles outbreaks became more common due to a lack of herd immunity.

Research scandals with ethical failures are littered throughout history, but some took place not that long ago.

Some scientists in positions of power have historically mistreated or even abused research participants to investigate research problems at any cost. These participants were prisoners, under their care, or otherwise trusted them to treat them with dignity.

To demonstrate the importance of research ethics, we’ll briefly review two research studies that violated human rights in modern history.

These experiments were inhumane and resulted in trauma, permanent disabilities, or death in many cases.

After some Nazi doctors were put on trial for their crimes, the Nuremberg Code of research ethics for human experimentation was developed in 1947 to establish a new standard for human experimentation in medical research.

In reality, the actual goal was to study the effects of the disease when left untreated, and the researchers never informed participants about their diagnoses or the research aims.

Although participants experienced severe health problems, including blindness and other complications, the researchers only pretended to provide medical care.

When treatment became possible in 1943, 11 years after the study began, none of the participants were offered it, despite their health conditions and high risk of death.

Ethical failures like these resulted in severe harm to participants, wasted resources, and lower trust in science and scientists. This is why all research institutions have strict ethical guidelines for performing research.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

  • Normal distribution
  • Measures of central tendency
  • Chi square tests
  • Confidence interval
  • Quartiles & Quantiles
  • Cluster sampling
  • Stratified sampling
  • Thematic analysis
  • Cohort study
  • Peer review
  • Ethnography

Research bias

  • Implicit bias
  • Cognitive bias
  • Conformity bias
  • Hawthorne effect
  • Availability heuristic
  • Attrition bias
  • Social desirability bias

Ethical considerations in research are a set of principles that guide your research designs and practices. These principles include voluntary participation, informed consent, anonymity, confidentiality, potential for harm, and results communication.

Scientists and researchers must always adhere to a certain code of conduct when collecting data from others .

These considerations protect the rights of research participants, enhance research validity , and maintain scientific integrity.

Research ethics matter for scientific integrity, human rights and dignity, and collaboration between science and society. These principles make sure that participation in studies is voluntary, informed, and safe.

Anonymity means you don’t know who the participants are, while confidentiality means you know who they are but remove identifying information from your research report. Both are important ethical considerations .

You can only guarantee anonymity by not collecting any personally identifying information—for example, names, phone numbers, email addresses, IP addresses, physical characteristics, photos, or videos.

You can keep data confidential by using aggregate information in your research report, so that you only refer to groups of participants rather than individuals.

These actions are committed intentionally and can have serious consequences; research misconduct is not a simple mistake or a point of disagreement but a serious ethical failure.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Bhandari, P. (2023, June 22). Ethical Considerations in Research | Types & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved February 22, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/research-ethics/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Pritha Bhandari

Other students also liked, data collection | definition, methods & examples, what is self-plagiarism | definition & how to avoid it, how to avoid plagiarism | tips on citing sources, what is your plagiarism score.

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • HHS Author Manuscripts

Logo of nihpa

Plagiarism, Cheating and Research Integrity: Case Studies from a Masters Program in Peru

Andres m. carnero.

1 School of Public Health and Administration, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru

Percy Mayta-Tristan

2 School of Medicine, Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas, Lima, Peru

Kelika A. Konda

3 David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA

Edward Mezones-Holguin

Antonio bernabe-ortiz.

4 CRONICAS, Center of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru

German F. Alvarado

Carlos canelo-aybar, jorge l. maguiña.

5 Department of Parasitology, U.S. Naval Medical Research Unit No. 6 (NAMRU-6), Lima, Peru

Eddy R. Segura

Antonio m. quispe.

6 Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA

Edward S. Smith

7 School of Medicine, Universidad San Martin de Porres, Lima, Peru

Angela M. Bayer

Andres g. lescano.

Plagiarism is a serious, yet widespread type of research misconduct, and is often neglected in developing countries. Despite its far-reaching implications, plagiarism is poorly acknowledged and discussed in the academic setting, and insufficient evidence exists in Latin America and developing countries to inform the development of preventive strategies. In this context, we present a longitudinal case study of seven instances of plagiarism and cheating arising in four consecutive classes (2011–2014) of an Epidemiology Masters program in Lima, Peru, and describes the implementation and outcomes of a multifaceted, “zero-tolerance” policy aimed at introducing research integrity. Two cases involved cheating in graded assignments, and five cases correspond to plagiarism in the thesis protocol. Cases revealed poor awareness of high tolerance to plagiarism, poor academic performance, and widespread writing deficiencies, compensated with patchwriting and copy-pasting. Depending on the events’ severity, penalties included course failure (6/7) and separation from the program (3/7). Students at fault did not engage in further plagiarism. Between 2011 and 2013, the Masters program sequentially introduced a preventive policy consisting of: (i) intensified research integrity and scientific writing education, (ii) a stepwise, cumulative writing process; (iii) honor codes; (iv) active search for plagiarism in all academic products; and (v) a “zero-tolerance” policy in response to documented cases. No cases were detected in 2014. In conclusion, plagiarism seems to be widespread in resource-limited settings and a greater response with educational and zero-tolerance components is needed to prevent it.

Science aims at expanding knowledge through systematic generation and testing of hypotheses, which can then be used for the benefit of humanity. To achieve this goal, science is guided by several values, including objectivity, honesty and unselfishness ( Allchin 1999 ; Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy et al. 2009 ). Disregard to these values can result in research misconduct ( Steneck 2006 ; Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy et al. 2009 ), which distorts the scientific record, wastes resources, and undermines the trust of society in science ( Steneck 2006 ). Plagiarism, the misappropriation of other’s intellectual contribution, is a serious form of research misconduct, and probably one of the most frequently reported type of research misconduct ( Smith 2000 ). Despite the challenges in ascertaining the true frequency of plagiarism, recent estimates (around 2 %) suggest that it is much more common than previously thought ( Pupovac and Fanelli 2015 ). However, this high frequency compared to other forms of research misconduct may partially result from enhanced detection by electronic methods.

Plagiarism can occur at any point in the career of a researcher, but it is more frequently reported in the early stages ( Martinson et al. 2005 ), and relatively few studies have explored its origins during undergraduate and early post-graduate research ( Swazey et al. 1993 ; Wadja-Johnston et al. 2001 ; Krstic 2015 ). Early training stages may constitute a critical period to prevent plagiarism, when students begin to actively engage in research. If uncorrected, plagiarism and cheating may continue throughout the researcher’s career, and can potentially lead to other misconduct ( Lovett-Hopper et al. 2007 ; Park 2003 ). During training, plagiarism can become part of a broader set of dishonest behaviors aimed at obtaining undeserved academic advantage (such as copying in an exam, taking credit for another’s work, and prohibited collaboration between students), which are collectively termed “cheating” ( Park 2003 ).

Plagiarism is a global problem, yet evidence of its occurrence comes almost exclusively from developed countries ( Ana et al. 2013 ). Studies exploring plagiarism in developing countries are critically needed ( Ana et al. 2013 ), given that cultural and economic factors may affect the perception of and engagement in plagiarism ( Davis 2003 ; Martin 2012 ). In developing countries, several unique factors may enable plagiarism such as: (i) lack of training in the Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) ( Rodriguez and Lolas 2011 ; Davis 2003 ; Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ; Cameron et al. 2012 ); (ii) poor development of writing skills ( Heitman and Litewka 2011 ; Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ; Cameron et al. 2012 ); (iii) tolerance to misconduct during education and professional activities ( Heitman and Litewka 2011 ; Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ); (iv) lack of institutional policies and oversight of academic centers and journals ( Rodriguez and Lolas 2011 ; Heitman and Litewka 2011 ; Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ); (v) differing perceptions of intellectual property and misconduct ( Heitman and Litewka 2011 ; Davis 2003 ; Cameron et al. 2012 ); (vi) the pervasive effect of corruption ( Heitman and Litewka 2011 ); and (vii) cultural differences in values ( Rodriguez and Lolas 2011 ; Heitman and Litewka 2011 ; Davis 2003 ; Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ; Cameron et al. 2012 ). Discussing plagiarism in Latin America is an important issue, given the dramatic growth of research activities in the region in the last two decades ( Van Noorden 2014 ; Catanzaro et al. 2014 ). In particular, sporadic reports have highlighted the occurrence of plagiarism in research conducted in Latin America ( Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ; Alfaro-Tolosa et al. 2013 ), and the reaction of scientific journals ( Alfaro-Tolosa et al. 2013 ; Almeida et al. 2015 ). In addition, Latin American countries share many cultural features, arising from their common colonial history, that may affect how plagiarism and cheating are perceived ( Martin 2012 ; Salter and Guffey 2001 ), including collectivism, high uncertainty avoidance, high power distance, high indulgence, and a short-term orientation ( Hofstede 2011 ). Finally, the fact that Latin American countries share a common language (mainly Spanish, but also Portuguese, which are closely related) and culture may facilitate the development of effective control strategies with the potential to reach >10 % of the world’s population. Despite its importance, plagiarism has not been systematically studied in Latin America ( Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ; Alfaro-Tolosa et al. 2013 ), and little evidence exists on its frequency, determinants, and consequences in the Latin American setting. In particular, there is a lack of evidence about the implementation of effective, affordable, and context-specific interventions targeted at preventing plagiarism and promoting research and academic integrity among research students in Latin America ( Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ).

In this article, we present a case study of seven instances of plagiarism and cheating detected between 2011 and 2014 in our Masters program in Epidemiologic Research in Lima, Peru, that receives students from a broad range of countries in Latin America. We also describe the implementation and outcomes of a feasible, low-cost, “zero tolerance” policy tailored to promote research integrity among postgraduate research students in Latin America.

The Program

The Masters in Epidemiologic Research of Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia is a postgraduate program offered annually since 2007 in Peru. The program aims at training epidemiologists capable of designing and executing high-quality research and publishing in top-tier peer-reviewed international journals. It was created jointly by Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia (UPCH), the leading university in biomedical research in Peru ( SCImago Research Group 2015 ), and the U.S. Naval Medical Research Unit No. 6 (NAMRU-6), and was created with funding from the Fogarty International Center (grant 2D43 TW007393). The courses are structured in four 10-week terms, and an overall coursework of 10 months. It is coordinated and taught almost entirely by young scientists with international graduate training, many of them doctorates from U.S. and European universities. The core coursework includes three series of courses taught in each of the four terms of the program, progressively advancing into more complex topics: Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Research Methods. Additional compulsory courses address complementary research topics: Outbreak investigation (Term 1), Epidemiologic surveillance (Term 2), Validation of instruments (Term 2), Health situation analysis (Term 3), Qualitative research (Term 3), Program evaluation (Term 4), and Writing research proposals (Term 4). Topics on career-advancement are discussed as part of the Research Methods I-IV courses. Since 2013, the program is offered by the UPCH School of Public Health and Administration, whereas past editions were offered by the School of Medicine (2007–2009) and the School of Postgraduate Studies (2010–2012). Academic and research misconduct are critically important issues, and lectures addressing RCR, research ethics, and scientific writing have been part of the program since its inception. Students also complete the CITI research ethics course early in the program ( Braunschweiger and Goodman 2007 ; Litewka et al. 2008 ). Contents on research integrity have evolved in time, expanding the discussion of plagiarism, responsible authorship, and adequate referencing as needed ( Table 1 ). Each class has 20–30 students, usually junior researchers with a biomedical background from local research groups, governmental agencies and clinical/medical centers. Since 2011, the program has received an increasing number of international students from countries in South and Central America and the Caribbean.

Summary of RCR and scientific writing contents in the Masters in Epidemiologic Research Program curriculum (2011–2013), Lima, Peru

CITI Collaborative institutional training initiative ( www.citiprogram.org ), IRB institutional review board

Case Studies

We present here all seven cases of plagiarism and cheating discovered between the fourth (2011) and seventh (2014) classes of the Masters program, although other cases probably remained undetected because of limited surveillance, particularly before 2011. The information presented is based on the experiences of faculty directly handling the cases. All conversations with the students at fault took place in private settings, and class discussions about the events preserved their anonymity. All cases are described as male here to further support anonymity. Figure 1 summarizes key information of the cases and the response measures implemented by our program.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is nihms842129f1.jpg

Timeline of cases of academic misconduct in the Masters in Epidemiologic Research Program (2011–2013), Lima, Peru

Cheating Case 1: Epidemiology I Course, April 2011

During the first term Epidemiology course, students were asked to complete a brief individual take-home assignment consisting of short-answer questions, and e-mail their responses to the teaching assistant (TA). Explicit instructions regarding the individual nature of the assignment were given and no discussion was allowed between students. One hour before the deadline, the TA received an e-mail with a student’s homework attached, which had been shared with the rest of the class:

Hi guys! Continuing with the love chain!!!! Hahahaha. I’m sending Epi’s exercise 2, for those of you that are on a tight schedule … please let me know if you find anything wrong!:) ….

The student’s behavior violated the standards of conduct by sharing individual work and requesting review of an individual assignment by other students. The event was immediately communicated to the course and program coordinators, and was discussed with the class 3 h later, preserving the anonymity of the student involved in the case. During the discussion, the class tried to minimize the importance of the event, and faculty required substantial effort to explain that the incident constituted severe academic misconduct and would not be tolerated. Coordinators evaluated potential sanctions to both the student who shared the assignment and the whole class, given that no student reported the incident. Finally, the coordinators decided jointly to fail the student on the assignment, and initiate disciplinary probation for the rest of the academic year. Penalty to the class was waived, given the short time students had to report the event (3 h). Additional sessions to discuss plagiarism and research integrity were added to the curricula. Given that the incident occurred early in the academic year, no information exists regarding the student’s academic performance prior to the incident. The student completed all the required coursework that year under close supervision and intensive counseling, maintaining a low academic performance (ranked 18 of 22), without any evidence of further misconduct.

Plagiarism Case 1: Research Methods I Course, May 2011

A student’s final assignment (first draft of the thesis proposal) exhibited highly heterogeneous writing, with clear and well-written sections interspersed with less-developed sections and poorly presented arguments. In addition, some of the cited material was unrelated to the sources quoted, and the text included uncommon terminology (e.g. general practitioners were referred as “generalist physicians”). The coordinator searched the suspiciously-written sections in Google ® , as described by Rojas-Revoredo et al. (2007) . Several paragraphs were found to be unacknowledged verbatim fragments of published articles. The next day, the course and program coordinator met at the student’s workplace to discuss the incident with the student in private. After initial denial, the student finally accepted committing plagiarism, and was failed in the course and separated from the program for the rest of the year. The university authorities were informed and a misconduct report was filed in the student’s permanent academic record. In addition, the student was warned that consideration of future readmission was conditional on preparing an RCR guide for future students. The incident was discussed with the class at the beginning of the second term and substantial knowledge gaps and ambivalence towards plagiarism were noted. Plagiarism was thoroughly discussed, and five writing workshops were added to each term, at the class’ request. The student contacted the program coordinator in 2012 and was readmitted to the program after completing the required material. Prior to the event, the student had poor performance (ranked 29 of 30). After readmission, the student completed all the required courses under close monitoring and intensive counselling, exhibiting average performance (ranked 16 of 30), and without evidence of any further incidents. After this incident, a paragraph describing plagiarism and its potential sanctions (including course failure) was added to the syllabi of all courses.

Plagiarism Cases 2 and 3: Research Methods II Course, July 2011

The final assignment (final draft of the thesis proposal) of two separate students presented evidence highly suggestive of plagiarism. One case exhibited partial use of quotation marks, while the other presented evidence of self-plagiarism. After searching for the suspicious fragments in the web, plagiarism and self-plagiarism were confirmed. Upon confrontation, both students initially denied the events, but eventually one accepted the misconduct, while the student who committed self-plagiarism did not accept having engaged in any misbehavior. Both students were failed in the course, separated from the program for the rest of the year, and the event was notified to the School of Postgraduate Studies. Two weeks later, the student who did not admit fault contacted the university authorities to start legal action. The authorities from the School of Postgraduate Studies discussed the case in depth with the program coordinator and endorsed program’s decision. Finally, the student desisted from taking legal action, and contacted the program in early 2013 to inquire about readmission, but did not complete the re-admission process. Both students had low academic performance in the program (ranked 26 out of 27). The other student was readmitted in 2012 but exhibited poor performance (ranked 26 of 26), and has not completed all the required coursework yet. The event was discussed with the class, and some students argued that throughout their education they repeatedly witnessed and resorted to similar behavior without any indication that it constituted a dishonest practice. One student even mentioned that a mentor in medical residency once said: “all has been written already, (publishing) only requires putting the pieces together”, which seemed to be an invitation to plagiarize. Starting the following year, all students were required to sign an integrity agreement accepting to avoid plagiarism, disclose any misconduct cases witnessed (whistle-blowing) and acknowledge that failure to do so would make them accomplices. The document also specified the potential sanctions for such behaviors. Finally, content on RCR, responsible authorship, plagiarism and adequate referencing was thoroughly enhanced in the first term Research Methods course.

Cheating Case 2: Biostatistics I Course, April 2012

On April 2012, during an individual quiz, two students turned in identical solutions, even with the same variable names and Stata ® code. The next day, the TA and course coordinator interviewed both students, one of which admitted having requested repeatedly the exam to the other student, whom eventually shared the answers. One day later, the program coordinator received an e-mail from the student apologizing for the misconduct, accepting all the responsibility for the incident, relieving the other student from any liability, and resigning from the program. The e-mail was promptly answered with the indication that resignation from the program was not possible, as the student was going to be expelled from the program. The School of Postgraduate Studies was then notified about this event, and the student was expelled from the program. After extensive discussion among the coordinators, the student that shared the exam was failed in the exam with a grade of zero, and was allowed to continue in the program at the end of the term. As the program had just started, no evidence is available on the academic performance of the two students prior to this event. The student that shared the exam eventually failed the Research Methods IV course, nearly failing the program due to low academic performance (ranked 19 of 20). No evidence exists of involvement in further events. An 8-week Research Integrity course was added to the first term’s curriculum the following year, addressing extensively research integrity, RCR, plagiarism and appropriate referencing, among other topics.

Plagiarism Case 4: Research Methods III Course, October 2013

The introduction section of a thesis proposal contained passages highly suggestive of plagiarism. After searching for these sections in Google ® , literal plagiarism from research articles and the web was confirmed. Upon questioning by the course and program coordinator, the student admitted committing plagiarism, albeit without realizing that it constituted misconduct. The student was failed in the course, and the incident was discussed anonymously with the rest of the class, reiterating the severity of plagiarism and how to avoid it. Also, students were warned that any further plagiarism cases would be expelled from the program. Until the event occurred, the student had very low academic performance (ranked 26 of 26). The student completed the rest of the program’s coursework under close monitoring and intensive counseling, with low performance (ranked 25 of 25), and was not involved in other misconduct incidents.

Plagiarism Case 5: Research Methods III Course, October 2013

One week after the class discussion of the previous case of plagiarism, the final assignment of a student (full thesis proposal) had several sections strongly suggestive of literal plagiarism. A Google ® search evidenced that these paragraphs were identical to the content of several websites, including Wikipedia ® . The program and course coordinator discussed the incident with the student, and after a long explanation of the definition of plagiarism, the student recognized having plagiarized inadvertently. Given the thorough discussion of plagiarism in the Research Integrity course, writing workshops, and the previous plagiarism case a week before, the student was failed in the course and separated from the program for the rest of the year. The event was reported to the university, and a misconduct report was filed in the student’s permanent academic record. When given the opportunity to address the class, the student described the case, accepted all responsibility for having plagiarized, and warned the class about the severity and importance of preventing plagiarism. The class recognized the severity of the event, but unanimously asked for a more lenient sanction, arguing that the student may have missed prior warnings. Despite accepting misconduct, the student argued the sanction was too harsh and presented a notarized letter requesting a formal decision. The student’s work supervisors contacted the program coordinator in coordination with the student, inquiring about the incident and the program’s response, and full details were provided. The university confirmed the sanction imposed by the program and the student recently contacted the program to try to finish the coursework. Prior to the event, the student had a low performance (ranked 24 of 26).

Most of the cases of plagiarism and cheating detected involved students with a record of suboptimal academic performance in the program. Indeed, 20 % of students in the lowest quartile of their class were involved in plagiarism and cheating compared to only 2 % of students in higher grade quartiles (risk ratio = 12.2; 95 % confidence interval: 2.5–60.2, Fisher’s exact p value = 0.008). Also, none of the four cases described above who actually completed their coursework later had successfully defended their dissertations. No cases were detected in the 2014 class, which suggests a very strong impact of the policy implemented, despite the fact that the reduction in the incidence of plagiarism and cheating is only marginally significant (Fisher’s exact p value = 0.187).

Discussion In three consecutive annual classes of our Epidemiology Masters in Peru, we detected five cases of plagiarism and two cases of cheating, including literal plagiarism, self-plagiarism, inappropriate sharing of work, and appropriation of other students’ work. We believe that these are not isolated events, but rather the manifestation of a widespread and frequent misconduct that has probably gone undetected beyond our program. This is consistent with the high rates of cheating and plagiarism reported worldwide among high school and undergraduate students ( McCabe 2005 ; McCabe et al. 2001 ), including students of medical and allied health sciences ( Rennie and Crosby 2001 ; Taradi et al. 2010 ). It is likely that plagiarism and cheating may originate in high school and undergraduate education, and continue to graduate education. Thus, the widespread occurrence of plagiarism at all levels of education suggests that prevention, detection and response to plagiarism should hold a much higher priority in academic institutions in contexts like Peru and Latin America.

Students committing plagiarism and cheating shared several predisposing characteristics, including poor awareness of research integrity and plagiarism, widespread deficiencies in writing and referencing skills, poor academic performance, and a high tolerance to plagiarism. However, a significant portion of the rest of the class also shared a limited awareness of research integrity and tolerance to plagiarism, and many students had difficulty in grasping research integrity concepts. This is consistent with previous reports evidencing insufficient knowledge of RCR and plagiarism in graduate students in the U.S., particularly among international graduates ( Heitman et al. 2007 ; Ryan et al. 2009 ). These knowledge gaps may be particularly severe in Latin America, where shortcomings in higher education neglect the discussion of plagiarism and academic and research integrity. In addition, lack of development of analytic and writing skills may lead some students to use plagiarism as a maladaptive, compensatory writing strategy. The situation is further complicated by a widespread tolerance to plagiarism throughout the education system in Latin America ( Vasconcelos et al. 2009 ; Heitman and Litewka 2011 ). In Peru, for example, the National Assembly of Rectors reduced the sanction of two undergraduate law students guilty of literal plagiarism from a semester suspension to a simple reprimand, arguing that “copying without indicating the source is a natural behavior in students” ( Tantaleán Odar 2014 ), and that “teaching consists fundamentally in a constant repetition of external ideas, often omitting the sources for brevity” ( Tantaleán Odar 2014 ). Furthermore, several authors have reported that a large proportion of undergraduate research and approved theses contain plagiarism ( Saldana-Gastulo et al. 2010 ; Huamani et al. 2008 ). The synergic effect of limited awareness of plagiarism, RCR, and scientific writing, and the widespread tolerance to plagiarism highlights the need to couple intensive anti-plagiarism education with stronger response policies.

Any attempt to expunge plagiarism is unlikely to succeed without institutional commitment with scientific integrity ( Whitley and Keith-Spiegel 2001 ; Park 2004 ). Institutions should have a transparent, comprehensive and uniformly applied policy that is embedded in a context of promotion of academic integrity. UPCH has an established institutional policy against academic misconduct, which is supplemented by the regulations of each school ( Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia 2009 ). However, such a framework focuses almost exclusively on punitive aspects, neglecting preventive and detection strategies. Additionally, regulations have not been widely disseminated and/or discussed across the university’s academic programs, and their application seems inconsistent across programs. Nevertheless, our findings are probably not an isolated case, as lack of comprehensive policies against and widespread tolerance to plagiarism appear to be nearly universal in educational institutions in countries such as Peru. Thus, the institutions’ commitment and proactivity to address plagiarism is critical for the implementation of any effective and sustainable intervention against cases of plagiarism in the future. As a program, we are disappointed to see our students falling due to misconduct, but are not embarrassed to admit we had these issues. We believe many other programs face the same challenges and should come forward to admit it openly and therefore create greater awareness and response.

In this complex scenario, we adopted a “zero tolerance” policy against plagiarism ( Titus et al. 2008 ), in which we actively searched for potential research misconduct and all suspected cases are reported, investigated and sanctioned as dictated by the severity of the case. Although there is no current consensus worldwide on the best way to respond to plagiarism findings, we believe that a zero tolerance approach is the most acceptable alternative, as it results in a clear, strong message that plagiarism and other forms of research misconduct are wrong and can never be justified. In low-resource settings, resource constraints and dependence on external funding may discourage investigating apparently “mild” cases to avoid the associated costs and potential damages in reputation. However, the long term adverse consequences of tolerating plagiarism and therefore graduating student with poor RCR knowledge, outweigh any of these short term apparent benefits. None of the students who committed/attempted plagiarism were known to engage in further events during the program and no additional misconduct events have been detected in the 2014 class.

Our “zero tolerance” policy was actively complemented by intensive education on research integrity and scientific writing. Also, policies were reinforced through discussion sessions, written statements describing the policy in all course syllabi, and a modified honor code in the form of a signed agreement to maintain research and academic integrity and report any observed cases. Honor codes constitute a simple, low-cost strategy that has been shown to prevent academic misconduct ( McCabe et al. 2001 ). However, our experience collaborating with several Latin American educational institutions, has led us to believe that honor codes are not frequently used in Latin America. Furthermore, we feel that although many Latin American educational institutions may have codes of conduct, these are probably not discussed with students, faculty and researchers. We feel that signing a short but very clear and explicit honor code may be a more effective alternative for preventing misconduct by directly engaging students and all the academic and scientific community.

Education in the RCR is a critical pillar for maintaining research integrity and preventing plagiarism ( Steneck and Bulger 2007 ; Kalichman 2007 ), and comprised the medullar aspect of our policy. Seminars on plagiarism and scientific writing were upgraded into an obligatory course on research integrity. Short online research integrity courses were used as additional activities, including both the required CITI basic RCR course for biomedical researchers ( Braunschweiger and Goodman 2007 ; Litewka et al. 2008 ), as well as the optional, free, online RCR course recently created by UPCH and NAMRU-6 ( http://www.cri.andeanquipu.org/index.php/es/ ). The definition, forms, implications and case studies of plagiarism were thoroughly discussed, and practical advice was given on preventing plagiarism ( Roig 2009 ; Fischer and Zigmond 2011 ). Frequent maladaptive forms of writing, such as “patchwriting”, in which original and borrowed text are intermixed ( Cameron et al. 2012 ), and “copy/paste” were thoroughly discussed, emphasizing their intimate relation to plagiarism. Students were advised to express ideas taken from external sources in their own words, always linking each idea to its original source, and never to copy and paste. Other educative interventions implemented included: (i) breaking down extensive written assignments into multiple, smaller assignments, to allow the incremental development of writing skills ( Fischer and Zigmond 2011 ); (ii) provision of templates, so that students have a clear idea of what is expected for each assignment ( Fischer and Zigmond 2011 ); (iii) review of progress in an increased number of writing workshops, to provide detailed and timely guidance, allow early detection and correction of maladaptive writing strategies ( Fischer and Zigmond 2011 ); and, (iv) requirement of more student-advisor meetings, in order to increase the oversight of the students’ work, and promote mentoring, an important strategy for maintaining research integrity ( Anderson et al. 2007 ).

As a complement to educative interventions, we now screen academic products for plagiarism ( Barret et al. 2003 ; McKeever 2006 ) using widely-available search engines (e.g. Google ® ) ( McKeever 2006 ). Searching actively for plagiarism allowed close monitoring the policy’s efficacy, and early identification and guidance of students with inadequate referencing skills ( Barret et al. 2003 ; McKeever 2006 ). This measure closely parallels the routine screening of submissions that has been increasingly implemented by scientific journals ( Butler 2010 ). In Peru, NAMRU-6 requires that the final version of all articles reporting research conducted at the institution is checked for plagiarism before being submitted using iThenticate ® (Andres G. Lescano personal communication, April 2015). In our program, plagiarism is evaluated on a case-by-case basis, after investigation and discussion among all coordinators and the faculty involved in the case. Penalties were also defined individually, following the program and university’s policy, and were complemented with rehabilitative measures ( Whitley and Keith-Spiegel 2001 ), such as intensive counseling by an experienced faculty and remedial educative activities.

The case study approach we adopted does not allow a formal evaluation of the efficacy of our program’s policy against plagiarism and cheating, but it may expand the extant literature in Latin America. Our experience delivered several important learning points. First, plagiarism seems to be widespread, likely involving all stages of the educative system. Second, it is possible to implement a “zero tolerance” plagiarism prevention policy with a strong educational component in postgraduate research programs. We implemented a promising, feasible, low-cost policy tailored for postgraduate research students in Latin America, with the aim to offer educators and researchers practical alternatives to prevent and address plagiarism that they could continue to evaluate in their practice. Third, key features associated with plagiarism in Latin America that should be considered when discussing plagiarism in the classroom include the unawareness of plagiarism and its implications, the pervasiveness of poorly-developed writing skills, and the extensive use of “patchwriting” and “copy/paste”. Fourth, students with low academic performance may be at higher risk of committing plagiarism, and implement personalized tutoring and close surveillance to prevent them from plagiarizing. Given that our experience pertains a taught Masters program that receives students from several Latin American countries, we believe that our findings are applicable to postgraduate research students in Latin America. However, we emphasize that our findings may also be useful for educators and postgraduate research programs in other resource-limited, non-English speaking settings after critical assessment and a context-sensitive adaptation. Finally, it is urgent that educative institutions at all levels recognize the frequent occurrence of academic and research misconduct and integrity as an active, institutional duty. Furthermore, as the methods for engaging in dishonesty have expanded in the Internet era, preventive approaches coupled with zero tolerance for plagiarism and cheating will have a major role for controlling academic and research misconduct, even in low resource settings ( Grieger 2007 ).

Plagiarism and cheating appear to be a frequent problem in research training programs in resource-limited settings, such as Peru. These instances of misconduct should be addressed at institutional and programmatic levels through policies that prioritize preventive strategies, instead of purely punitive actions. Educational activities and mentoring should be complemented with strict, active detection and zero tolerance to misconduct.

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by the training Grant 2D43 TW007393-06 awarded to AGL by the Fogarty International Center of the U.S. National Institutes of Health. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Copyright Statement One author of this manuscript is an employee of the U.S. Government. This work was prepared as part of his duties. Title 17 U.S.C. § 105 provides that ‘Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government.’ Title 17 U.S.C. § 101 defines a U.S. Government work as a work prepared by a military service member or employee of the U.S. Government as part of that person’s official duties. The Corresponding Author has the right to grant on behalf of all authors and does grant on behalf of all authors, a worldwide license to the Publishers and its licensees in perpetuity, in all forms, formats and media (whether known now or created in the future), to (i) publish, reproduce, distribute, display and store the Contribution, (ii) translate the Contribution into other languages, create adaptations, reprints, include within collections and create summaries, extracts and/or, abstracts of the Contribution, (iii) create any other derivative work(s) based on the Contribution, (iv) to exploit all subsidiary rights in the Contribution, (v) the inclusion of electronic links from the Contribution to third party material wherever it may be located; and, (vi) license any third party to do any or all of the above.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: all authors had financial support from the NIH Fogarty International Center for the submitted work; all authors had paid teaching positions at Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia in the previous 3 years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Disclaimer The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense, nor the U.S. Government.

  • Alfaro-Tolosa P, Mayta-Tristan P, Rodriguez-Morales AJ. Publication misconduct and plagiarism retractions: A Latin American perspective. Current Medical Research and Opinion. 2013; 29 (2):1–2. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Allchin D. Values in science: An educational perspective. Science & Education. 1999; 8 :1–12. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Almeida RM, de Albuquerque Rocha K, Catelani F, Fontes-Pereira AJ, Vasconcelos SM. Plagiarism allegations account for most retractions in major latin American/Caribbean databases. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2015 [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Ana J, Koehlmoos T, Smith R, Yan LL. Research misconduct in low- and middle-income countries. PLoS Medicine. 2013; 10 (3):e1001315. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Anderson MS, Horn AS, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, Martinson BC. What do mentoring and training in the responsible conduct of research have to do with scientists’ misbehavior? Findings from a national survey of NIH-funded scientists. Academic Medicine. 2007; 82 (9):853–860. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Barret R, Malcolm J, Lyon C. Are we ready for large scale use of plagiarism detection tools?; 4th Annual LTSN-ICS Conference, 2003; 2003. [Accessed Jan 2012]. http://www.ics.heacademy.ac.uk/Events/conf2003/Ruth%20Barrett.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
  • Braunschweiger P, Goodman KW. The CITI program: An international online resource for education in human subjects protection and the responsible conduct of research. Academic Medicine. 2007; 82 (9):861–864. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Butler D. Journals step up plagiarism policing. Nature. 2010; 466 (7303):167. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Cameron C, Zhao H, McHugh MK. Publication ethics and the emerging scientific workforce: Understanding “Plagiarism” in a global context. Academic Medicine. 2012; 87 (1):51–54. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Catanzaro M, Miranda G, Palmer L, Bajak A. South American science: Big players. Nature. 2014; 510 (7504):204–206. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Committee on Science Engineering and Public Policy, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, & Institute of Medicine. On being a scientist: A guide to responsible conduct in research. 3rd. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Davis MS. The role of culture in research misconduct. Accountability in Research. 2003; 10 (3):189–201. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Fischer BA, Zigmond MJ. Educational approaches for discouraging plagiarism. Urologic Oncology. 2011; 29 (1):100–103. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Grieger MC. Ghostwriters and commerce of scientific papers on the internet: science at risk. Revista Da Associacao Medica Brasileira. 2007; 53 (3):247–251. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Heitman E, Litewka S. International perspectives on plagiarism and considerations for teaching international trainees. Urologic Oncology. 2011; 29 (1):104–108. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Heitman E, Olsen CH, Anestidou L, Bulger RE. New graduate students’ baseline knowledge of the responsible conduct of research. Academic Medicine. 2007; 82 (9):838–845. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Hofstede G. Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in contex. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture. 2011; 2 (1):26. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Huamani C, Dulanto-Pizzorni A, Rojas-Revoredo V. ‘Copy and paste’ in undergraduate research: Abusing Internet. Anales de la Facultad de Medicina. 2008; 69 (2):117–119. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Kalichman MW. Responding to challenges in educating for the responsible conduct of research. Academic Medicine. 2007; 82 (9):870–875. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Krstic SB. Research integrity practices from the perspective of early-career researchers. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2015; 21 (5):1181–1196. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Litewka S, Goodman K, Braunschweiger P. The ClTI program: An alternative for research ethics education in Latin America. Acta Bioethica. 2008; 14 (1):54–60. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Lovett-Hopper G, Komarraju M, Weston R, Dollinger SJ. Is plagiarism a forerunner of other deviance? Imagined futures of academically dishonest students. Ethics and Behavior. 2007; 17 (3):323–336. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Martin DE. Culture and unethical conduct: Understanding the impact of individualism and collectivism on actual plagiarism. Management Learning. 2012; 43 (3):261–273. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Martinson BC, Anderson MS, de Vries R. Scientists behaving badly. Nature. 2005; 435 :737–738. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • McCabe DL. Cheating among college and university students: A North American perspective. International Journal for Educational Integrity. 2005; 1 (1):1–11. [ Google Scholar ]
  • McCabe DL, Treviño LK, Butterfield KD. Cheating in academic institutions: A decade of research. Ethics and Behavior. 2001; 11 (3):219–222. [ Google Scholar ]
  • McKeever L. Online plagiarism detection services-saviour or scourge? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 2006; 31 (2):155–165. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Park C. In other (People’s) words: Plagiarism by university students—literature and lessons. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 2003; 28 (5):471–488. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Park C. Rebels without a clause: Towards an institutional framework for dealing with plagiarism by students. Journal of Further and Higher Education. 2004; 28 (3):291–306. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Pupovac V, Fanelli D. Scientists admitting to plagiarism: A meta-analysis of surveys. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2015; 21 (5):1331–1352. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Rennie SC, Crosby JR. Are “tomorrow’s doctors” honest? Questionnaire study exploring medical students’s attitudes and reported behaviour on academic misconduct. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) 2001; 322 :274–275. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Rodriguez E, Lolas F. The topic of research integrity in Latin America. Bioethikos. 2011; 5 (4):362–368. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Roig M. Avoiding plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and other questionable writing practices: A guide to ethical writing. [Accessed 12 Sept, 2011]; 2009 http://ori.hhs.gov/education/products/plagiarism/ [ Google Scholar ]
  • Rojas-Revoredo V, Huamani C, Mayta-Tristan P. Plagiarism in undergraduate publications: Experiences and recommendations. Revista Medica de Chile. 2007; 135 :1087–1088. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Ryan G, Bonanno H, Krass I, Scouller K, Smith L. Undergraduate and postgraduate pharmacy students’ perceptions of plagiarism and academic honesty. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education. 2009; 73 (6):105. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Saldana-Gastulo JJ, Quezada-Osoria CC, Pena-Oscuvilca A, Mayta-Tristan P. High frequency of plagiarism in medical thesis from a Peruvian public university. Revista Peruana de Medicina Experimental y Salud Publica. 2010; 27 (1):63–67. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Salter SB, Guffey DM. Truth, consequences and culture: A comparative examination of cheating and attitudes about cheating among U.S. and U.K. students. Journal of Business Ethics. 2001; 31 :37–50. [ Google Scholar ]
  • SCImago Research Group. SCImago Institution Rankings. [Accessed 2015 Mar 19]; Ranking Iberoamericano SIR 2015. 2015 http://www.scimagoir.com/pdf/iber_new/SIR%20Iber%202015%20HE.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
  • Smith R. What is research misconduct. Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh. 2000; 30 :4–8. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Steneck NH. Fostering integrity in research: Definitions, current knowledge, and future directions. Science and Engineering Ethics. 2006; 12 :53–74. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Steneck NH, Bulger RE. The history, purpose, and future of instruction in the responsible conduct of research. Academic Medicine. 2007; 82 (9):830–834. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Swazey J, Anderson M, Louis K. Ethical problems in academic research. American Scientist. 1993; 81 :542–553. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Tantaleán Odar RM. ¡¿Ya podemos plagiar?! Crítica a las resoluciones No 191-2009 y 288-2009-CODACUN. Derecho y Cambio Social, Año XI. 2014;(36):23. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Taradi SK, Taradi M, Knezevic T, Dogas Z. Students come to medical school prepared to cheat: A multi-campus investigation. Journal of Medical Ethics. 2010; 36 (1):666–670. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Titus SL, Wells JA, Rhoades LJ. Repairing research integrity. Nature. 2008; 453 :980–982. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia. Reglamento Disciplinario. 2009 http://www.upch.edu.pe/portal/images/stories/files/REGLAMENTO_DISCIPLINARIO.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
  • Van Noorden R. The impact gap: South America by the numbers. Nature. 2014; 510 (7504):202–203. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Vasconcelos S, Leta J, Costa L, Pinto A, Sorenson ME. Discussing plagiarism in Latin American science. EMBO Reports. 2009; 10 (7):677–682. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
  • Wadja-Johnston VA, Handal PJ, Brawer PA, Fabricatore AN. Academic dishonesty at the graduate level. Ethics and Behavior. 2001; 11 (3):287–305. [ Google Scholar ]
  • Whitley BE, Jr, Keith-Spiegel P. Academic integrity as an institutional issue. Ethics and Behavior. 2001; 11 (3):325–342. [ Google Scholar ]

research ethics case studies ppt

Princeton Dialogues on AI and Ethics

Princeton University

Case Studies

Princeton Dialogues on AI and Ethics Case Studies

The development of artificial intelligence (AI) systems and their deployment in society gives rise to ethical dilemmas and hard questions. By situating ethical considerations in terms of real-world scenarios, case studies facilitate in-depth and multi-faceted explorations of complex philosophical questions about what is right, good and feasible. Case studies provide a useful jumping-off point for considering the various moral and practical trade-offs inherent in the study of practical ethics.

Case Study PDFs : The Princeton Dialogues on AI and Ethics has released six long-format case studies exploring issues at the intersection of AI, ethics and society. Three additional case studies are scheduled for release in spring 2019.

Methodology : The Princeton Dialogues on AI and Ethics case studies are unique in their adherence to five guiding principles: 1) empirical foundations, 2) broad accessibility, 3) interactiveness, 4) multiple viewpoints and 5) depth over brevity.

OEC logo

Site Search

  • How to Search
  • Advisory Group
  • Editorial Board
  • OEC Fellows
  • History and Funding
  • Using OEC Materials
  • Collections
  • Research Ethics Resources
  • Ethics Projects
  • Communities of Practice
  • Get Involved
  • Submit Content
  • Open Access Membership
  • Become a Partner

Life and Environmental Science Ethics: Case Studies

This collection of cases covers topics related to Life and Environmental Science ethics including, agriculture ethics, bioethics, environmental ethics, and more. Cases come from a variety of online educational sources, ethics centers, and ethics programs.

Ethics Unwrapped. “Arctic Offshore Drilling.” 2021. https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/case-study/arctic-offshore-drilling.

  • Offshore oil and gas reserves, primarily along coastlines in Alaska, California, Louisiana, and Texas, account for a large proportion of the oil and gas supply in the United States. In August 2015, President Obama authorized Royal Dutch Shell to expand drilling off Alaska’s northwest coast. His decision brought into sharp relief the different, oftentimes competing views on the expansion of offshore drilling.

Ethics Unwrapped. “Climate Change & the Paris Deal.” 2021. https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/case-study/climate-change-paris-deal.

  • In December 2015, representatives from 195 nations gathered in Paris and signed an international agreement to address climate change, which many observers called a breakthrough for several reasons. First, the fact that a deal was struck at all was a major accomplishment, given the failure of previous climate change talks. Second, unlike previous climate change accords that focused exclusively on developed countries, this pact committed both developed and developing countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, the voluntary targets established by nations in the Paris climate deal fall considerably short of what many scientists deem necessary to achieve the stated goal of the negotiations: limiting the global temperature increase to 2 degrees Celsius. Furthermore, since the established targets are voluntary, they may be lowered or abandoned due to political resistance, short-term economic crises, or simply social fatigue or disinterest.

Ethics Unwrapped. “Patient Autonomy & Informed Consent - Ethics Unwrapped.” 2021. https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/case-study/patient-autonomy-informed-consent.

  • In the context of health care in the United States, the value on autonomy and liberty was cogently expressed by Justice Benjamin Cardozo in Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospitals (1914), when he wrote, “Every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body.” This case established the principle of informed consent and has become central to modern medical practice ethics . However, a number of events since 1914 have illustrated how the autonomy of patients may be overridden. In Buck v. Bell (1927), Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote that the involuntary sterilization of “mental defectives,” then a widespread practice in the U.S., was justified, stating, “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” Another example, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, in which African-American males were denied life-saving treatment for syphilis as part of a scientific study of the natural course of the disease, began in 1932 and was not stopped until 1972.

Ethics Unwrapped. “Prenatal Diagnosis & Parental Choice.” 2021. https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/case-study/prenatal-diagnosis-parental-choice.

  • In the United States, many citizens agree that the government may impose limits on the freedom of individuals when individuals interfere with the rights of others, but the extent of these limits is often a topic of debate. Among the most debated of bioethical issues is the issue of abortion, which hinges on whether the fetus is a person with rights, notably the right to life.

Ethics Unwrapped. “Retracting Research: The Case of Chandok v. Klessig.” 2021. https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/case-study/retracting-research-case-chandok-v-klessig.

  • In 2003, a research team from prominent laboratory the Boyce Thompson Institute (BTI) for Plant Research in Ithaca, New York published an article in the prestigious academic journal Cell. It was considered a breakthrough paper in that it answered a major question in the field of plant cell biology. The first author of this paper was postdoctoral researcher Meena Chandok, working under her supervisor Daniel Klessig, president of BTI at the time.

International Dimensions of Ethics Education in Science & Engineering. “IDEESE Case: GMOs.” University of Massachusetts Amherst, 2009. https://www.umass.edu/sts/ethics/online/cases/GMO/case.html.

  • High ethical concern about GM organisms has two sources: concerns for the integrity and sustainability of the natural environment and concern about the social consequences of allowing the supply of seeds or breeding stock to be controlled by developers (mainly though not exclusively large multinational corporations) having 20-year monopolies over the distribution of any particular genetic material as a consequence of patent rights.

International Dimensions of Ethics Education in Science & Engineering. “IDEESE Case: Stem Cell.” University of Massachusetts Amherst, 2009. https://www.umass.edu/sts/ethics/online/cases/StemCell/case.html.

  • Stem cells are undifferentiated cells in the human body which are able to replenish themselves by dividing. Under particular natural or medically induced circumstances, they are able to develop into more specialized cells for forming bones, nerves, body tissue, brains, muscles, and blood. Stem cell research has provoked considerable ethical concern; while many welcome the prospect of more effective treatments of birth defects or diseases, using human embryonic stem cells for such treatments, or even in scientific research, is very controversial. The embryo must be destroyed to secure its stem cells, and anyone who believes that human life begins at the moment of conception equates destroying embryos with committing murder. Excitement generated by the first acquisition of human embryonic stem cells in 1998 spread around the world. In South Korea, where scientists and the government had been attuned to advances in genetics, bioscience, and biotechnology since the mid-1980s, there was strong interest in taking up the new possibilities. Four years earlier, the South Korean government had adopted an ambitious "Plan 2000" intended to make South Korea one of the leading sites of bioscience and biotechnology research in the world. In 1990 it provided its national Genetics Research Institute with ample facilities in the new Taedok Science town just outside Seoul; in 1995 it expanded the Institute and renamed it the Korean Research Institute for Bioscience and Biotechnology to better reflect its expanded areas of work.

Iowa State University. “Case Studies.” Bioethics Program, 2021. https://bioethics.las.iastate.edu/a-note-about-case-studies-for-the-classroom/.

  • The following are helpful for introducing real-life ethics situations to students. These case studies are designed for teaching purposes, to help students develop critical responses to ethical issues, taking into account a multitude of viewpoints. Please feel free to use these case studies in your classrooms, or modify as necessary for your purposes. Please give credit where credit is due.

Teach the Earth. “Case of GMOs in Environmental Cleanup.” Across the Geoscience Currirulum, 2019. https://serc.carleton.edu/geoethics/activities/84049.html.

  • This case represents various agendas, hidden and otherwise, that can come into play during environmental remediation.

Teach the Earth. “Does A River Have Rights?” Across the Geoscience Curriculum, 2019. https://serc.carleton.edu/geoethics/activities/84031.html.

  • Individual students have different ethical "lines." This class discussion proceeds with a series of prompts that presents a set of scenarios that explores ethical boundaries. Students discuss right and wrong actions with respect to a river and discuss why those actions are "right" or "wrong" as well as how their ethical viewpoints vary.

Submit Content to the OEC   Donate

NSF logo

This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Award No. 2055332. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

PowerShow.com - The best place to view and share online presentations

  • Preferences

Free template

Phil 7570 Case Studies in Research Ethics - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

research ethics case studies ppt

Phil 7570 Case Studies in Research Ethics

Phil 7570 case studies in research ethics fall 2006 bryan benham department of philosophy outline course objectives & overview why be concerned ethical framework ... – powerpoint ppt presentation.

  • Bryan Benham
  • Department of Philosophy
  • Course Objectives Overview
  • Why be concerned?
  • Ethical Framework
  • Research Misconduct vs. RCR
  • hum.utah.edu/bbenham
  • www.research.utah.edu/integrity/index.html
  • Increase ethical sensitivity to issues regarding RCR
  • Based on ORIs 9 core areas, plus
  • Aid in developing moral reasoning skills
  • Case Studies
  • Acquaint with relevant policies, procedures, and professional standards of ethical research.
  • Lectures and Discussions
  • The focus of the course is not merely understanding legal or explicit regulations, but identifying and employing the underlying ethical principles and values that guide responsible research, so that one can (ideally) navigate the rocky shoals and murky waters of daily research practice.
  • Course Director
  • Bryan Benham (Philosophy)
  • Faculty Fellows (Fall/Spring)
  • Kathi Mooney (Nursing)
  • Kim Korinek (Sociology)
  • Rachel Hayes-Harb (Linguistics)
  • Frank Whitby (Biochem)
  • Tom Richmond (Chemistry)
  • Leslie Francis (Phil Law)
  • Additional Faculty (Fall)
  • David Grunwald (Genetics)
  • Dana Carroll (Biochem)
  • Michael Kay (Biochem)
  • Jim Metherall (Genetics)
  • Marty Rechsteiner (Biochem)
  • Alice Schmid (Genetics)
  • Matt Williams (Pathology)
  • Jody Rosenblatt (OncSci)
  • Course Structure
  • Ten Week Course (Thursdays, 400-530)
  • Lecture and Small Group Discussion of Case Studies
  • Requirements
  • Attendance no less than 8 of 10
  • Readings Case Studies (Available Online)
  • Final Paper Case Study Analysis and Evaluation
  • Why be Concerned?
  • Seoul National University
  • 1999 announced cow cloning(s)
  • But, not confirmed.
  • Science, March 12, 2004
  • somatic cloning
  • Science, June 17, 2005
  • 11 hESC lines
  • August, 2005
  • Cloned dog, Snuppy
  • Leader of World Stem Cell Hub
  • Accused of paying for donated eggs,
  • some from lab techs.
  • Gerald Schatten (U Pitt.) ceased collaborations, and withdrew name from 2005 Science paper.
  • Both Science papers found to have fabricated data subsequently retracted.
  • Also, charges of embezzlement and government collusion.
  • Removed from SNU and WSCH.
  • Breach of international legal and
  • ethical codes re egg donation.
  • Finding of misconduct, re Science papers.
  • Authorship issues, re Gerald Schatten.
  • Set back international cooperation on stem cell research, plus raised public concern about stem cell research.
  • Financial Conflict of Interest and Govt involvement.
  • Review of Hwang Woo Suks research shows his embryonic stem cells were the product of parthenogenesis.
  • It could have been a seminal finding if they hadnt had their blinders on. (Kent Vrana, Penn State University)
  • New York Times, Aug. 3, 2007
  • Scientific American, Aug. 2, 2007
  • Cell Stem Cell, Aug. 2, 2007
  • A professor publishes ideas and experiments developed by her graduate student, without giving credit to the student.
  • A researcher presents a paper that shows 33 data points that are consistent with his hypothesis, but doesnt report the other 12 data points that are significantly inconsistent with his hypothesis.
  • An experimenter recruits subjects for his study on cognitive effects of stress on children, but advertises it as a study on the role of social interactions in child learning.
  • While waiting to hear from a journal about her latest paper submission, a new assistant professor hears from the editor that the paper is held up by a reviewer who has been extremely busy, but professor suspects the reviewer may be delaying her paper in order to publish first with similar findings.
  • A researcher published favorable results for a new memory enhancing drug, without disclosing that she serves as a consultant and holds stocks in the company that is developing this new drug.
  • A FORMER GRADUATE STUDENT at Michigan State University was sentenced on Monday to 10 months in prison for faking the theft of his own research materials. The student, Scott M. Doree, was supposed to be working on a vaccine to prevent a pneumonialike disease in pigs, but he apparently had not done any research for several years, authorities say.
  • http//chronicle.com/daily/2003/08/2003082102n.htm .
  • NIH funded survey
  • 3,247 early/mid career
  • Top 10 Behaviors
  • plus expect an underreporting bias.
  • What results from a culture of irresponsible research or unreflective research practice?
  • History of Research Ethics
  • Human Participation Nazis, Willowbrook, Tuskegee, etc.
  • Misconduct Baltimore Affair, S. Korean Debacle, etc.
  • COI Commercial Interests Political Influence
  • Research is a Social Activity
  • No researcher is an island collaboration on rise
  • Research is funded by public funds for public good
  • Research has serious consequences for society
  • Research is a Profession
  • Accepted Standards of Behavior (Codes of Ethics)
  • Professional Integrity Reputation
  • Interest in Self-regulation
  • Public Trust
  • Wuchty, Jones, Uzzi. 2007. The Increasing Dominance of Teams in Production of Knowledge. Science 316, May 18 1036-39.
  • Both big and not-so-big-science exhibit unethical (and/or unreflective) research practices.
  • Both big and not so big science are professional and social activities that have profound consequences for future research, individuals, and society.
  • (and it is required for grant support)
  • Hence, we should be concerned with responsible conduct of research.
  • The focus of the course is not merely the legal or explicit regulations, but identifying and employing the underlying ethical principles and values that guide responsible research, so that one can (ideally) navigate the rocky shoals and murky waters of daily research practice.
  • Determining what one should do
  • Right/wrong, good/bad, better/worse
  • Principled and Practical
  • Promotion and Prevention
  • Not mysterious, subjective, arcane practice of analysis or deliberation,
  • but a balancing act
  • Imagine you are waiting at a bus stop. A bus pulls over an opens the door, but since it is not your bus, you dont get on. Suddenly, from out of the blue, a stranger runs by you and leaps on the bus. As the bus pulls away you notice that the stranger must have dropped his wallet. You examine the wallet finding 100, but no identification.
  • Return the wallet, with the money.
  • Return the wallet, but keep the money.
  • Dont return the wallet, keep the money.
  • Dont return the wallet, but donate the money to a charity.
  • Its the right thing to do.
  • The wallet/money is not yours.
  • It would make stranger happy (or unhappy)
  • More people would benefit.
  • Too much trouble.
  • I (or the charity) could use the money.
  • Finders Keepers
  • In accord with an ethical principle.
  • Leads to good consequences.
  • Weighs everyones interests.
  • Violates an ethical principle.
  • Leads to bad consequences.
  • Doesnt weigh everyones interests.
  • What rules or principles apply?
  • What are the consequences?
  • Whose interests are involved?
  • General dont kill, steal, etc.
  • Specific accuracy, openness, etc.
  • Source Law, Religion, Social/Prof., etc.
  • Individuals
  • Groups or Institutions
  • Society at large
  • Past, Present or Future
  • We should be concerned with responsible conduct of research because research is a social and professional practice with consequences.
  • Ethical Framework includes balancing answers to three questions in the analysis and deliberation of ethical cases.
  • Generally, research that is done in an unethical or unprofessional manner.
  • Technically
  • Office of Science and Technology Policy (Dec. 2000)
  • "fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results."
  • This is not meant to include honest mistake or error in research. But a finding of misconduct does require "that there be a significant departure from accepted practices of the relevant research community" proven by the preponderance of evidence.
  • "questionable research practices, such as unethical or sloppy scientific conduct that is not fabrication, falsification or plagiarism.
  • University of Utah
  • "fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other practices that seriously deviate from those practices that are commonly accepted within the research community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research. It does not include honest error or honest difference in interpretations or judgments of data."
  • Fabrication is making up results and recording or reporting the fabricated results.
  • Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record.
  • Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit and without specific approval, including those obtained through confidential review of others' research proposals and manuscripts.
  • Honesty and accuracy
  • Preservation of Research Record
  • Give Credit where Credit is Due
  • Consequences
  • Undermines other research and collaborations
  • Undermines public trust
  • Researchers
  • Individuals affected by the research
  • Social Implications
  • Is this falsification of data? Why or why not?
  • Does it make a difference if his results are reproducible? Or fail to be exactly reproduced?
  • Why is this important for research?
  • In order to help his promising post-doc, Prof. Nice lets the post-doc look at some older, already funded grant proposals on a similar topic. Pressed for time the post-doc incorporates large segments of the methods section into her own grant proposal.
  • Is this plagiarism? Why or why not?
  • Dr. Brown's research group recently published an important paper in a leading journal.  Several months after the publication of the manuscript, Dr. Brown is contacted by two colleagues who are not able to reproduce the findings reported. Dr. Brown meets with Adam Green, the postdoctoral fellow who did the experiments in question to review the results from the lab notebook. Once in Dr. Brown's office, Adam confesses that he has been remiss in keeping his data book. All of his experiments were recorded on computer and other electronic media. Adam transcribed many of these experiments into his lab book. However, there was a period of several days when his computer was infected by a virus was not working properly.  Although Adam fixed the problem much of his data was gone. He relied on his memory to transcribe the results of those particular experiments into his lab book.  After completing the figures for the manuscript, Adam was pleased to find that his data supported Dr. Brown's hypothesis.
  • Is this fabrication of data? Why or why not?
  • FFP and other practices that seriously deviate from those practices that are commonly accepted within the research community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research.
  • Science is ambiguous
  • Discovery - at the edge of knowledge
  • Credibility - publication of findings
  • Discovery takes place at the edge of knowledge, an ambiguous place where no one has been before. At the edge, one must make risky choices and address hard questions What should be done first? How does one recognize data, especially when one is searching for something never seen before? And when experimental results do not meet ones expectation, is it because ones original idea was wrong, or because the methods used to test the idea were wrong? Scientists have a saying Dont give up a good idea just because the data dont fit.
  • when it comes to distinguishing data from experimental noise, heuristic principles can be helpful, but an investigators experience and intuition -- in short, his or her creative insight -- will determine the final interpretation. To some, the selection of results might appear arbitrary and self serving, or even an example of misconduct. The case of Nobel laureate Robert A. Millikan, who selected 58 out of 140 oil drops from which he calculated the value of the charge of the electron, provokes precisely that kind of debate.
  • Studied the nature of electronic charge.
  • Following years of inconclusive research, Millikan publishes major paper on the results of a series of experiments on liquid droplets.
  • In the paper he stated that the results based on all droplets observed over 60 days.
  • But in his laboratory notebooks the observations were in fact only 58 out of 140 observations the 82 discarded observations did not fit his predictions or were instrumentation errors.
  • Is this misconduct? (Falsification or dishonesty)
  • Does it matter that in fact he was right, or that the totality of his research would still have great scientific importance, even if he had reported the discarded 82 observations? (Cf. Ptolemy, Galileo, Newton, etc.)
  • Was it just good scientific intuition or dogmatic insistence on his hypothesis?
  • Data Management and Ownership

PowerShow.com is a leading presentation sharing website. It has millions of presentations already uploaded and available with 1,000s more being uploaded by its users every day. Whatever your area of interest, here you’ll be able to find and view presentations you’ll love and possibly download. And, best of all, it is completely free and easy to use.

You might even have a presentation you’d like to share with others. If so, just upload it to PowerShow.com. We’ll convert it to an HTML5 slideshow that includes all the media types you’ve already added: audio, video, music, pictures, animations and transition effects. Then you can share it with your target audience as well as PowerShow.com’s millions of monthly visitors. And, again, it’s all free.

About the Developers

PowerShow.com is brought to you by  CrystalGraphics , the award-winning developer and market-leading publisher of rich-media enhancement products for presentations. Our product offerings include millions of PowerPoint templates, diagrams, animated 3D characters and more.

World's Best PowerPoint Templates PowerPoint PPT Presentation

research and publication ethics why and how

Research and publication ethics: why and how

Oct 29, 2019

4.17k likes | 6.78k Views

Research and publication ethics: why and how. Margaret Rees Reader Emeritus in Reproductive Medicine, University of Oxford Visiting Professor, University of Glasgow, Karolinska Institute and University of Turku

Share Presentation

  • research integrity
  • technical manipulation
  • data fabrication
  • support research integrity
  • publication represents fragmented data

hazeld

Presentation Transcript

Research and publication ethics: why and how Margaret Rees Reader Emeritus in Reproductive Medicine, University of Oxford Visiting Professor, University of Glasgow, Karolinska Institute and University of Turku Adjunct Associate ProfessorRobert Wood Johnson Medical School, at Rutgers University. Editor in Chief Maturitas Editor in Chief Case Reports in Women’s Health Conflict of interest: none declared

Background: who am I Ethics and Research • Member Open University Human Research Ethics Committee 2013-present • Advisor UKRIO 2010-present • Chair UK Association for Research Ethics (AfRE) 2014-2016 • Member Northumbria University Research Ethics Committee 2015-2017 • Chair Health Research Authority Ethics Committee (HRA)2006-2013 • Council member University of Oxford Research Ethics Committee (CUREC)2009-2014 • Researcher and supervisor: basic science, clinical trials and PI Publication • Editor in Chief Maturitas, Elsevier 2008- present • Editor in Chief Case Reports in Women’s Health Elsevier 2017- present • Editor in Chief J Br Menopause Soc/ Menopause International 1998-2008 • News editor COPE 2015-2016 • Secretary and Council member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) 2005-2015 • Member Elsevier ethics committee

The basics • Journals want to publish honest reproducible data without data fabrication/ falsification/ duplication/ salami slice or plagiarism • Studies in human beings need to comply to international norms for ethical approval and informed consent • Studies need to comply to international reporting guidelines ( CONSORT, STROBE, CARE, PROCESS etc)

MaturitasSize of ball indicating number of corresponding authors over last 5 years

Ethics principles • Guidance • Organisations • Consequences of misconduct

Ethics principles • Ensuring the dignity, safety and privacy of participants • National ethical, legal and regulatory norms and standards for research involving human subjects as well as applicable international norms and standards must be adhered to. • Ethical review should occur before the study begins and participants enrolled. • Assurance of ethical review/ consent is required for publication

Research integrity • includes: • the use of honest and verifiable methods in proposing, performing, and evaluating research. • reporting research results with particular attention to adherence to rules, regulations, guidelines, and. • following commonly accepted professional codes or norms. • https://grants.nih.gov/grants/research_integrity/whatis.htm

Integrity, organisations, statements • UKRIO http://ukrio.org/ • UUK Concordat to support research integrity http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/policy-and-analysis/reports/Pages/research-concordat.aspx • The Singapore Statement on Research Integrity 2010 http://www.singaporestatement.org/ • The Montreal Statement on Research Integrity in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations 2013 http://www.equator network.org/2013/11/14/montreal-statement-on research-integrity-in-cross-boundary-research collaborations/ • COPE http://publicationethics.org/

UKRIO • The UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO) is an independent charity, offering support to the public, researchers and organisations to further good practice in academic, scientific and medical research. We promote integrity and high ethical standards in research, as well as robust and fair methods to address poor practice and misconduct. We pursue these aims through our publications on research practice, in-depth support and services for research employers, our education and training activities, and by providing expert guidance in response to requests for assistance from individuals and organisations. • Established in 2006, our aims are to: • Promote the good governance, management and conduct of academic, scientific and medical research. • Share good practice on how to address poor practice, misconduct and unethical behaviour. • Give confidential, independent and expert advice on specific research projects, cases, problems and issues.

UUK Concordat

Singapore statement 2010 • Honesty in all aspects of research • Accountability in the conduct of research • Professional courtesy and fairness in working with others • Good stewardship of research on behalf of others

Code of practice/ professional bodies • Office of Research Integrity in US • GMC • British Psychological Society • Royal Society

COPE • Promoting integrity in research publication • COPE is a forum for editors and publishers of peer reviewed journals to discuss all aspects of publication ethics. It also advises editors on how to handle cases of research and publication misconduct. • Flow charts

Retraction watch and PubPeer • Retraction Watch is a blog that reports on retractions of scientific papers and on related topics. The blog was launched in August 2010 and is produced by science writers Ivan Oransky and Adam Marcus. Retraction database launched 2018 • https://retractionwatch.com/ • The PubPeer Foundation is a California-registered public-benefit corporation with 501(c)(3) nonprofit status in the United States. The current focus is maintaining and developing the PubPeer online platform for post-publication peer review. • https://pubpeer.com/static/about

https://ori.hhs.gov/content/case-summary-elqutub-maria-cristina-miron https://ori.hhs.gov/content/case-summary-elqutub-maria-cristina-miron

Consequences of misconduct • Human health (MMR) • Sanctions by institutions and professional bodies/ dismissal • Imprisonment • Adverse effects on reputation of institutions and their staff and co authors • Waste of research money • Expression of concern, retraction or removal of publications (RW database: nearly 17,000 retractions)

Data fabrication/ falsification • Completely fabricated data set • Alteration of the data set • Image manipulation https://www.nature.com/authors/policies/image.html

Data fabrication and falsification • Data fabrication: This concerns the making up of research findings. • Data falsification: Manipulating research data with the intention of giving a false impression. This includes manipulating images (e.g. micrographs, gels, radiological images), removing outliers or “inconvenient” results, changing, adding or omitting data points, etc. • With regard to image manipulation it is allowed to technically improve images for readability. Proper technical manipulation refers to adjusting the contrast and/or brightness or color balance if it is applied to the complete digital image (and not parts of the image). Any technical manipulation by the author should be notified in the cover letter to the Journal Editor upon submission. Improper technical manipulation refers to obscuring, enhancing, deleting and/or introducing new elements into an image. Generally, if an author’s figures are questionable, it is suggested to request the original data from the authors. • https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/editors/data-fabrication-data-falsification/4170https://www.springer.com/gp/authors-editors/editors/data-fabrication-data-falsification/4170

Duplicate salami slice submission (Elsevier) • Unlike duplicate publication , which involves reporting the exact same data in two or more publications, salami slicing it involves breaking up or segmenting a large study into two or more publications. These segments are referred to as "slices“ of a study • As a general rule, as long as the "slices" of a broken up study share the same hypotheses, population, and methods, this is not acceptable practice. The same "slice" should never be published more than once. • The reason: according to the U.S. Office of Research Integrity, salami slicing can result in a distortion of the literature by leading unsuspecting readers to believe that data presented in each salami slice (i.e., journal article) is derived from a different subject sample. This not only skews the "scientific database" but it creates repetition that wastes readers' time as well as the time of editors and reviewers, who must handle each paper separately. Further, it unfairly inflates the author's citation record. • There are instances where data from large clinical trials and epidemiological studies cannot be published simultaneously, or are such that they address different and distinct questions with multiple and unrelated endpoints. In these cases, it is legitimate to describe important outcomes of the studies separately. However each paper should clearly define its hypothesis and be presented as one section of a much larger study. • Most journals request that authors who either know or suspect a manuscript submitted for publication represents fragmented data should disclose this information, as well as enclose any other papers (published or unpublished) that might be part of the paper under consideration.

Effects of fabricated data: MMR vaccine and Wakefield • The Lancet paper was a case series of 12 child patients; it reported a proposed “new syndrome” of enterocolitis and regressive autism and associated this with MMR as an “apparent precipitating event.” But in fact: • Three of nine children reported with regressive autism did not have autism diagnosed at all. Only one child clearly had regressive autism • Despite the paper claiming that all 12 children were “previously normal,” five had documented pre-existing developmental concerns.......................... • Cite this as: BMJ 2011; 342:c5347

MMR scare and consequences • Wakefield AJ, Murch SH, Anthony A, Linnell, Casson DM, Malik M, et al. Ileal lymphoid nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. Lancet 1998;351:637-41 [retracted].2010 • General reduced use of vaccines • In addition to measles outbreaks UK and US, other infections are resurgent eg whooping cough, mumps, rubella and other diseases eg dengue not being prevented • Consequences: death, disability, infertility

Measles 2018 (WHO) • Measles cases in Europe tripled between 2017 and 2018 to 82,596 - the highest number recorded this decade • Over 90% of cases were in 10 countries • In 1967, the year before measles vaccine was introduced in England and Wales, there were almost half a million reported cases and 99 deaths. By 1998, this had fallen to an all-time low of 56 cases and no deaths. • In 2018 in the UK, there were 953 measles cases

Researcher banned from federal Canadian funding after misconduct loses medical license • The files she submitted to the University of Toronto Inquiry were files she personally manipulated and not the original files of her Research Associate as she claimed. • She illegally accessed patient records to alter data and destroy and change computer files. • She disposed of an old computer so the forensic computer experts could not examine it. • She went into the Canadian Blood Services facility and changed freezer temperatures to damage blood and urine samples in a strenuous attempt to cover up her deceptions during the IC’s investigation. This prolonged deception and dishonesty is considered by the Committee to constitute serious professional misconduct. • Dr. Jamal attempted to put all the blame on other people. Retraction Watch 29 Jan 2019

Jon Sudbø: a Norwegian dentist, physician, and former medical researcher, who was exposed as a scientific fraudster in 2006. • Exposed when he published in the Lancet in 2005 a paper that claimed that long-term use of anti-inflammatories could reduce the risk of oral cancer in smokers. • A major phase III US-funded preventative trial for oral cancer to be led by Sudbo was planned to start in 2006 was suspended just days before it was to start. •  Permitted to work as a dentist but not allowed to do research until 2036  https://ori.hhs.gov/content/case-summary-sudbo-jon

Sato and Iwamoto: osteoporosis data fabrication • Sato: Data fabrication for many clinical trials, leading to retractions • Fake trials lead to real trials which find no effect/ meta-analyses and guidelines compromised • Iwamoto: Gift authorship for more than a decade • Sato died end 2016(circumstances uncertain) /Iwamoto dismissed and works in another hospital • http://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6403/636 Osteoporosis affects 1 in 3 women and 1 in 5 men. Hip fracture has a high mortality

1925 image manipulation: element 43, technetium For Science King & Country: The Life and Legacy of Henry Moseley 2018 ISBN-10: 1910500712

1925: image manipulation

Investigating misconduct • The lead author is no longer alive • The other authors do not have functional emails • The paper was accepted when submissions were by paper or email. All the records from this time no longer exist, including the original manuscript and the peer reviewers' comments. • There is no named person or response from the institution who have been requested to investigate

Conclusion • Ethics and integrity are integral to good research and publication and not an option or regulatory burden

  • More by User

“This is a Test. This is Only a Test!”

“This is a Test. This is Only a Test!”

“This is a Test. This is Only a Test!”. * Overcoming Test Anxiety* Presented by: Brenda Peedin Tutor Coordinator Student Support Services TRiO Johnston Community College. Who is likely to get test anxiety?. Those people who worry a lot Perfectionists

1.37k views • 10 slides

Software Testing

Software Testing

Test Lifecycle and Test Process. Software Testing. Test Level Process. Test Planning and Control. Test Planning and Control. Test Analysis and Design Review test basis Identify test condition Decide test design tech. Evaluate testability Setup Environment.

1.7k views • 124 slides

3D Test Issues

3D Test Issues

Bill Eklow October 26, 2011. 3D Test Issues . 3D Test Challenges – Key Areas (http://www.itrs.net/) . Defects TSV’s Test access Test Flows/Test Scheduling Heterogeneous Die Debug Power. 3D Sources of defects (known good -> unknown). Thermal (Reliability, Performance)

985 views • 14 slides

Test and Test Equipment December 2012 Hsin -Chu , Taiwan

Test and Test Equipment December 2012 Hsin -Chu , Taiwan

Test and Test Equipment December 2012 Hsin -Chu , Taiwan. Roger Barth. Chapter Content. Test Drivers & Challenges Test & Yield Learning Test Cost Concurrent/Adaptive Test 3D Device Test Test Technology Requirements Test parallelism DFx

5.42k views • 18 slides

Who wants to be a Millionaire?

Who wants to be a Millionaire?

Who wants to be a Millionaire?. Hosted by Miss Cook. The Prizes. 8 - Doughnuts 9 – Formula Card on Test 10 – 2% Test E.C. 11 – 3 % Test E.C. 12 – 5% Test E.C. 13 – Group Test 14 – 100% on Test. 1 – A “good job!” 2 – A “Terrific!” 3 – A “Fantastic!” 4 – Calculator on Test

745 views • 18 slides

Test Preparation, Test Taking Strategies, and Test Anxiety

Test Preparation, Test Taking Strategies, and Test Anxiety

Test Preparation, Test Taking Strategies, and Test Anxiety. PASS 0900. Before the Test. Spread studying over several days Ask instructor what to expect Make a list of what is to be studied for the test Use review material in book Review by yourself or with other students

818 views • 13 slides

Test Automation Tools: QF-Test and Selenium

Test Automation Tools: QF-Test and Selenium

Test Automation Tools: QF-Test and Selenium. by P. Kratzer / P.Sivera Software Engineer ESO. Introduction to QF-Test. QF-Test is a GUI test tool for Java and web apps developed by German company Quality First Software GmbH (QFS) Vendor web site: http://www.qfs.de/en/

824 views • 19 slides

System Test Specification

System Test Specification

STV. TSPC. System Test Specification. Location of the Test Specification Sources of Test Cases Test Cases from the Requirements Specs Test Cases from the Design Documentation Test Cases from the Usage Profile Test Case Selection Criteria Black-Box Test Methods Data Flow Analysis

689 views • 26 slides

TDC ( Test Description Code)

TDC ( Test Description Code)

TDC ( Test Description Code). CSH version 1.4 - duration 45 min. TDC (Test Description Code) Overview. What is TDC? User documentation Test tool chain Features Test Structure Test Case definition Example of converted test cases Pratical Requirements

501 views • 15 slides

Engine Condition Diagnosis

Engine Condition Diagnosis

Engine Condition Diagnosis. Compression test Cranking vacuum test Cylinder leakage test Dynamic compression test Idle vacuum test. Paper test Power balance test Restricted exhaust Running compression test Vacuum test Wet compression test. KEY TERMS.

2.1k views • 56 slides

Chi-square test or c 2 test

Chi-square test or c 2 test

Chi-square test or c 2 test. Chi-square test. Used to test the counts of categorical data Three types Goodness of fit Independence Homogeneity. c 2 distribution –. df=3. df=5. df=10. c 2 distribution. Different df have different curves Skewed right Only positive values

1.23k views • 25 slides

200

Test. Test. Test. Test. Test. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 200. 200. 200. 200. 200. 300. 300. 300. 300. 300. 400. 400. 400. 400. 400. 500. 500. 500. 500. 500. May kill fish or other organisms. What is acid rain?. Used to preserve food. What is sodium nitrate?.

856 views • 51 slides

Test del Software, con elementi di Verifica e Validazione, Qualità del Prodotto Software

Test del Software, con elementi di Verifica e Validazione, Qualità del Prodotto Software

Test del Software, con elementi di Verifica e Validazione, Qualità del Prodotto Software. G. Berio. Argomenti Introduttivi. Definizione(i) di test Test d’accettazione e test dei difetti Test delle unità e test in the large (test d’integrazione e test di sistema) (strategie di test)

4.82k views • 90 slides

Test of Significance

Test of Significance

Test of Significance. Presenter: Vikash R Keshri Moderator: Mr. M. S. Bharambe. Outline. Introduction : Important Terminologies. Test of Significance : Z test. t test. F test. Chi Square test. Fisher’s Exact test. Significant test for correlation Coefficient.

3.29k views • 54 slides

System Test Tools

System Test Tools

SYST. TOOL. System Test Tools. Test atorTool Categories Tools for SystemTest Management Tools for System Test Operations Test Plan Editing Tool (TESTPLAN) Test Case Specification Tool (TESTSPEC) Test Documentation Tool (TESTDOC) Test Data Generator (TESTDATA)

915 views • 26 slides

Lesson 7

Lesson 7. How do you conduct a radon test?. Prepare for the test. Determine timing of the test How long test will last Appropriate weather conditions during test period Convenience of owner or resident Determine the location of the test Consider how to prevent or detect interference.

2.77k views • 40 slides

Got any suggestions?

We want to hear from you! Send us a message and help improve Slidesgo

Top searches

Trending searches

research ethics case studies ppt

18 templates

research ethics case studies ppt

16 templates

research ethics case studies ppt

21 templates

research ethics case studies ppt

st patricks day

11 templates

research ethics case studies ppt

world war 1

45 templates

research ethics case studies ppt

calendar 2024

33 templates

Celebrate Slidesgo’s big 5! Five years of great presentations, faster

Ethics Presentation templates

Ethics is a part of philosophy that tries to define things such as "good" and "bad", or "right" and "wrong". are you a teacher or an expert on ethics then you'll know that the right thing to do is download and customize these google slides themes or powerpoint templates..

Ethical Dilemmas in Marketing presentation template

Ethical Dilemmas in Marketing

When we do marketing, it is important to keep in mind that everything we do is ethical. Otherwise, we will end up losing the trust of our customers. If this is a topic you want to discuss with your company's managers, we recommend using this Slidesgo presentation. Its blue color...

Doodle Style Ethics & Values Booklet presentation template

Premium template

Unlock this template and gain unlimited access

Doodle Style Ethics & Values Booklet

What are the values of Slidesgo? Perhaps commitment? Professionalism? A little bit of cheering humor? Variety? It's difficult to judge by ourselves, so it might be an ethical thing to let you tell us! In any case, here's a new template in A4 format, ready to be customized with contents...

Ethical Dilemmas Infographics presentation template

Ethical Dilemmas Infographics

The concept of good and evil are concepts on which philosophy has reflected a lot. Many times, we do not know if we are doing the right thing or not, and we end up in an ethical dilemma. This can be extrapolated to any situation or field, such as, for...

Ethics in the Work Environment Theme for Business presentation template

Ethics in the Work Environment Theme for Business

The best way to achieve great success in a business environment is when there are good ethics among the company. To have a good colleague relationship in the work environment is essential to be comfortable and work at ease in order to achieve the best results. Make a presentation about...

Ethical Code Thesis Defense presentation template

Ethical Code Thesis Defense

What is an ethical code? Well, we know you know the answer, because you are looking for presentation templates for your thesis defense on this topic. Although... let's take a final check before the big moment of presenting your work. An ethical code is a document that includes a set...

Anger Management, Ethics & Values Booklet for Students presentation template

Anger Management, Ethics & Values Booklet for Students

Even we have noticed that our collection of templates about anger management keeps increasing... Is that any kind of hint directed at us? But we're so nice! Look, here's a colorful template in A4 format, created as a booklet and ready to be printed (after you've edited the slides). The...

Ethics Training for Social Media presentation template

Ethics Training for Social Media

Talking about ethics in social media is a very important issue today, so we are sure that your proposal for a training on this topic will be very well received, especially if you present it with this cute and delicate template designed with pastel colors and modern illustrations that will...

Virtue Ethics & Values Booklet presentation template

Virtue Ethics & Values Booklet

Even though it’s easy to believe that ethics and morality are a stagnant, non-mutable idea that can’t change, the reality is that there have been different approaches to this concept from different philosophers. One of the most famous thinkers of the virtue ethics movement is Socrates, the guy who only...

Ethics and the Criminal Defense Lawyer Thesis Defense presentation template

Ethics and the Criminal Defense Lawyer Thesis Defense

The time has finally come for you to defend your thesis on ethics and the criminal defense lawyer. And let us tell you, it's been quite the journey. But don’t worry, because we have found the perfect visual assistant to accompany you on this scholarly adventure. It's full of illustrations...

Public Health Ethics - Master of Public Health presentation template

Public Health Ethics - Master of Public Health

Download the Public Health Ethics - Master of Public Health presentation for PowerPoint or Google Slides. As university curricula increasingly incorporate digital tools and platforms, this template has been designed to integrate with presentation software, online learning management systems, or referencing software, enhancing the overall efficiency and effectiveness of student...

Ethical Trade Consulting presentation template

Ethical Trade Consulting

Responsible business practices are key to ethical trade, and this Google Slides and PowerPoint template encapsulate the essence of fairness and sustainability. Whether you're addressing clients, colleagues, or stakeholders, this fully editable slide deck provides a professional and engaging framework to convey your ideas seamlessly. Embrace the power of impactful...

Medical School Bioethics Center presentation template

Medical School Bioethics Center

What happens inside a bioethics center? With this creative presentation full of illustrations and a great combination of pastel colors you can speak to your future students what they will learn in the field of bioethics. It’s very important for medicine students to know the ethical dilemmas in their field...

Ethics and Morals Lesson for Elementary School presentation template

Ethics and Morals Lesson for Elementary School

When you're just a little kid, you think you know what's right and wrong, but... you really don't. Adults are supposed to know, but not all of them are to be trusted... What's undeniable is that, if you aren't taught about ethics when you're a kid, it will be difficult...

Professional Ethics Conference presentation template

Professional Ethics Conference

When you have to speak at a conference, it is essential to use a visual support with the most important information of your speech to catch the attention of your audience and, at the same time, make them remember the information you decided to highlight. Include images, a font that...

Ethics, Nature and Society for Elementary presentation template

Ethics, Nature and Society for Elementary

Teach kids the importance of ethics, nature and society through this fun and educational template! With cute, pastel colors and basic geometric and abstract shapes, this template is sure to capture your students' attention. Perfect for elementary level students, this template provides an easy way to introduce core concepts of...

Ethical Clothing Company Profile presentation template

Ethical Clothing Company Profile

You have no idea how many pieces of clothing are manufactured every year. More than we can actually wear! It's time to shift to a more ethical approach. Get sustainable, get creative! Customize this template to show your company profile to other companies or potential partners or distributors. The brutalist...

Abstract Boho Style Ethics & Values Booklet presentation template

Abstract Boho Style Ethics & Values Booklet

A great way of sharing knowledge about ethics & values is with booklets: they have the perfect extension, they are short but can convey lots of data in a beautiful, small, portable book. This creative template will work as the perfect starting point for your printable booklet: we have included...

AI Ethics for Marketing presentation template

AI Ethics for Marketing

It's time to talk about AI again! The ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) in marketing is an important and evolving topic. As AI technology becomes more and more integrated into marketing strategies, a number of ethical issues arise that need to be considered. Consumer privacy, algorithmic bias or liability and...

  • Page 1 of 6

New! Make quick presentations with AI

Slidesgo AI Presentation Maker puts the power of design and creativity in your hands, so you can effortlessly craft stunning slideshows in minutes.

Five years of great presentations, faster

Celebrate Slidesgo’s big 5!

IMAGES

  1. PPT

    research ethics case studies ppt

  2. Ethics in research ppt by jiya

    research ethics case studies ppt

  3. PPT

    research ethics case studies ppt

  4. PPT

    research ethics case studies ppt

  5. PPT

    research ethics case studies ppt

  6. PPT

    research ethics case studies ppt

VIDEO

  1. Ethics Case Studies Classes 2023

  2. ETHICS CASE STUDIES-Ethical Dilemmas in Corporate HR Management|LECTURE-3|UPSC CSE MAINS|LevelUp IAS

  3. ETHICS vs MORALITY

  4. Ethics Case Study

  5. Research Ethics

  6. Ethics Video: Why you must know about the Research Ethics Committee

COMMENTS

  1. PDF Introduction to research ethics 2015.ppt (Read-Only)

    Introduction to research ethics 2015.ppt (Read-Only) Introduction to Research Integrity (AKA "Responsible Conduct of Research" or "Research Ethics") Dr. Lisa Rasmussen Department of Philosophy UNC Charlo9e June 2015 Outline IntroducCon Moral FoundaCons of Research Main areas of Focus in Research Integrity

  2. Resources for Research Ethics Education

    Many of the principles discussed below for discussing case studies can be generalized to other approaches to encouraging discussion about research ethics. Cases are designed to confront readers with specific real-life problems that do not lend themselves to easy answers.

  3. Case Studies

    Case Studies More than 70 cases pair ethics concepts with real world situations. From journalism, performing arts, and scientific research to sports, law, and business, these case studies explore current and historic ethical dilemmas, their motivating biases, and their consequences.

  4. PPT University of Arizona

    Jeff Cooper Albany Medical Center, Ethical Decision Making, 2001, p. 1Ą > Zk ZK Z K ó | V ¨ Research EthicsĄ , ¨ śTwo types of ethical decision-making Deductive or principle based reasoning Inductive or case based reasoning Jeff Cooper Albany Medical Center, Ethical Decision Making, 2001, p. 1Ą >% ZI ZI Zn I ó } W ¨ Research EthicsĄ ...

  5. Annual Review of Ethics Case Studies

    Research Ethics Cases are a tool for discussing scientific integrity. Cases are designed to confront the readers with a specific problem that does not lend itself to easy answers.

  6. Ethical Considerations in Research

    Ethical considerations in research are a set of principles that guide your research designs and practices. Scientists and researchers must always adhere to a certain code of conduct when collecting data from people.

  7. Discussion Tools: Case Studies

    Case studies are a tool for discussing scientific integrity. Although one of the most frequently used tools for encouraging discussion, cases are only one of many possible tools. Many of the principles discussed below for discussing case studies can be generalized to other approaches to encouraging discussion about research ethics.

  8. PDF Casebook on Ethical Issues in International Health Research

    provided permission for one of their case studies to be adapted and included here. We would also like to acknowl-edge the case studies developed by workshop participants in the UNDP-UNFPA-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HPR) in Bangkok, Thailand, 2004. We also

  9. PDF Case Studies

    A set of ethics case studies from physics research, with an activity and discussion guide for courses and seminars in science ethics TM Case Studies ETHICS. 1 Teacher Edition Case Studies ETHICS TM ... advisor will be giving the first major presentation on the technique at a major international conference in a

  10. Ethics In Research

    Ethics In Research | PPT Ethics In Research G Grant Heller Clinical Health Psychologist Jul 1, 2007 • 142 likes • 101,572 views Education Technology Spiritual 1 of 37 Recommended Ethics in Research Maria Kalyvaki, PhD,MBA,MEd Research ethics omidjami Research ethics Preston Healthcare Consulting Research Ethics Makati Science High School

  11. Plagiarism, Cheating and Research Integrity: Case Studies from a

    Since 2013, the program is offered by the UPCH School of Public Health and Administration, whereas past editions were offered by the School of Medicine (2007-2009) and the School of Postgraduate Studies (2010-2012). Academic and research misconduct are critically important issues, and lectures addressing RCR, research ethics, and scientific ...

  12. PPT

    Ethics and Research. Ethics and Research. Research Ethics Overview & Case Studies. Rebecca W. Dahl, PhD Director - Human Subjects Protection Program. Research Ethics. The following commentary by Nicholas von Hoffman appeared in the Washington Post. 790 views • 48 slides

  13. PDF Engineering Ethics: Three Case Studies

    Microsoft PowerPoint - 2017 ENGINEERING ETHICS ENGINEERING ETHICS: THREE CASE STUDIES (Subtitle: EVERYTHING SHOULD BE AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE, BUT NOT SIMPLER) Victor Singer, P.E. (retired) Dan Schiffbauer, P.E. Toshiba OVERVIEW: Canons or Codes of Ethics Noteworthy Historical Background for Each Case In Point

  14. Case Studies

    Three additional case studies are scheduled for release in spring 2019. Methodology: The Princeton Dialogues on AI and Ethics case studies are unique in their adherence to five guiding principles: 1) empirical foundations, 2) broad accessibility, 3) interactiveness, 4) multiple viewpoints and 5) depth over brevity.

  15. Life and Environmental Science Ethics: Case Studies

    The following are helpful for introducing real-life ethics situations to students. These case studies are designed for teaching purposes, to help students develop critical responses to ethical issues, taking into account a multitude of viewpoints. Please feel free to use these case studies in your classrooms, or modify as necessary for your ...

  16. PPT

    Phil 7570 Case Studies in Research Ethics Description: Phil 7570 Case Studies in Research Ethics Fall 2006 Bryan Benham Department of Philosophy Outline Course Objectives & Overview Why be concerned? Ethical Framework ... - PowerPoint PPT presentation Number of Views: 251 Avg rating:3.0/5.0 Slides: 55 Provided by: 15597329 Category:

  17. Phil 7570 Case Studies in Research Ethics

    Phil 7570 Case Studies in Research Ethics. Fall 2006 Bryan Benham Department of Philosophy. Outline. Course Objectives & Overview Why be concerned?

  18. Research Ethics PowerPoint Presentation Slides

    Download our easy-to-edit Research Ethics PPT template to explain the process of following ethical codes and moral principles that guide the conduct of research.

  19. Ethics in clinical trials

    2. Principle of essentiality • The research being carried out should be essential for the advancement of knowledge that benefits patients, doctors and all others in aspects of health care and also for the ecological and environmental well being of the planet. 3. Principles of voluntariness, informed consent and community agreement The ...

  20. Research ethics

    BioethicsResearch.pdf last and final ppt on research and publication.pptx Ethics in clinical research GROUP 6-1.pptx ethical and social research

  21. PPT

    Ethics principles • Ensuring the dignity, safety and privacy of participants • National ethical, legal and regulatory norms and standards for research involving human subjects as well as applicable international norms and standards must be adhered to. • Ethical review should occur before the study begins and participants enrolled.

  22. Chapter_4_Research_Ethics.ppt

    Ethical principles Ethical principles, then, fall into four main areas, namely, the need to: • Avoid harm to participants (and producing benefits) • Ensure informed consent of participants • Respect the privacy of participants • Avoid the use of deception. 9.

  23. Free Google Slides & PowerPoint templates on Ethics

    Teach kids the importance of ethics, nature and society through this fun and educational template! With cute, pastel colors and basic geometric and abstract shapes, this template is sure to capture your students' attention. Perfect for elementary level students, this template provides an easy way to introduce core concepts of...