Ethics and scientific publication

2005 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 59-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dale J. Benos ◽  
Jorge Fabres ◽  
John Farmer ◽  
Jessica P. Gutierrez ◽  
Kristin Hennessy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Of Interest ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Scientific Investigation ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Human Welfare ◽  
Ethical Violations ◽  
Duplicate Publication ◽  
Data Fabrication ◽  
Education And Awareness

This article summarizes the major categories of ethical violations encountered during submission, review, and publication of scientific articles. We discuss data fabrication and falsification, plagiarism, redundant and duplicate publication, conflict of interest, authorship, animal and human welfare, and reviewer responsibility. In each section, pertinent historical background and citation of relevant regulations and statutes are provided. Furthermore, a specific case(s) derived from actual situations is(are) presented. These cases were chosen to highlight the complexities that investigators and journals must face when dealing with ethical issues. A series of discussion questions follow each case. It is our hope that by increasing education and awareness of ethical matters relevant to scientific investigation and publication, deviations from appropriate conduct will be reduced.

How Scientists Communicate

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Kelly
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Scientific Communication ◽  
Scientific Publication ◽  
Good Communication ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Conference Presentations ◽  
Scientific Papers ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Media ◽  
Broad Overview

What is scientific research? It is the process by which we learn about the world. For this research to have an impact, and positively contribute to society, it needs to be communicated to those who need to understand its outcomes and significance for them. Any piece of research is not complete until it has been recorded and passed on to those who need to know about it. So, good communication skills are a key attribute for researchers, and scientists today need to be able to communicate through a wide range of media, from formal scientific papers to presentations and social media, and to a range of audiences, from expert peers to stakeholders to the general public. In this book, the goals and nature of scientific communication are explored, from the history of scientific publication; through the stages of how papers are written, evaluated, and published; to what happens after publication, using examples from landmark historical papers. In addition, ethical issues relating to publication, and the damage caused by cases of fabrication and falsification, are explored. Other forms of scientific communication such as conference presentations are also considered, with a particular focus on presenting and writing for nonspecialist audiences, the media, and other stakeholders. Overall, this book provides a broad overview of the whole range of scientific communication and should be of interest to researchers and also those more broadly interested in the process how what scientists do every day translates into outcomes that contribute to society.

Research Ethics Committees’ Oversight of Biomedical Research in South Africa: A Thematic Analysis of Ethical Issues Raised During Ethics Review of Non-Expedited Protocols

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Blessing Silaigwana ◽  
Douglas Wassenaar
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Research Ethics ◽  
South African ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Financial Contracts ◽  
Scientific Validity ◽  
Participant Selection ◽  
Education And Awareness

In South Africa, biomedical research cannot commence until it has been reviewed and approved by a local research ethics committee (REC). There remains a dearth of empirical data on the nature and frequency of ethical issues raised by such committees. This study sought to identify ethical concerns typically raised by two South African RECs. Meeting minutes for 180 protocols reviewed between 2009 and 2014 were coded and analyzed using a preexisting framework. Results showed that the most frequent queries involved informed consent, respect for participants, and scientific validity. Interestingly, administrative issues (non-ethical) such as missing researchers’ CVs and financial contracts emerged more frequently than ethical questions such as favorable risk/benefit ratio and fair participant selection. Although not generalizable to all RECs, our data provide insights into two South African RECs’ review concerns. More education and awareness of the actual ethical issues typically raised by such committees might help improve review outcomes and relationships between researchers and RECs.

Learning Ethics the Hard Way: Facing the Ethics Committee

1998 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Brad Johnson ◽  
Rioh'det Corser
Keyword(s):  
Professional Ethics ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Student Evaluation ◽  
Ethics Committee ◽  
Evaluation Data ◽  
Ethical Violations ◽  
Active Feedback ◽  
Formal Complaint ◽  
Teaching Professional

This article describes an approach to enhancing the value of case study material in teaching professional ethics in psychology. The mock committee approach involves a series of hearings convened fry students who rotate membership on a class ethics committee. Members of the class participate randomly as psychologists accused of various ethical violations. While the class observes, formal complaint hearings occur that result in official rulings and the setting of appropriate penalties and remedial requirements. The larger class then joins in active feedback and exchange with the committee to highlight and discuss salient ethical issues. We present and discuss student evaluation data for this technique and comment on the potential advantages of this teaching approach.

Legal ethics

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Tur
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Of Interest ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Applied Ethics ◽  
Legal Ethics ◽  
Role Morality ◽  
The Third ◽  
Integral Element ◽  
Principles And Standards ◽  
Set Up

Legal ethics can be considered from at least three related viewpoints. First, as ‘professional ethics’, it is a corpus of rules, principles and standards, often embodied in a written code and disseminated, applied and enforced by appropriate governing bodies as a guide to the professional conduct of lawyers. Legal professions set up specific institutions and officers to monitor and assist practitioners and to accumulate experience and expertise in applying detailed provisions in morally complex situations. For some commentators this is primarily regulation or administration and not ethics at all, but for others it is ethics in action or ‘applied ethics’. ‘Applied ethics’ is the second aspect of legal ethics, distinguished from ethics in general by the focus on ethical issues in the context of legal practice, including confidentiality, conflict of interest or acting for a morally disreputable client. Interesting though such questions may be in themselves, some writers do not acknowledge that they are truly questions of ethics, because the duties and privileges of specialist functional groups generally and lawyers in particular are not universalizable. For others, including some feminist ethicists, the ‘agent as such’ does not exist and we all encounter moral difficulties and problems, if we encounter them at all, only in the context of some specific relationship or role, for example in the role of a lawyer. Legal ethics thus requires an analysis of role morality. The third aspect of legal ethics is as an integral element in general philosophical and legal education.

Ethical Issues in Social Influence Research

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan J. Kimmel
Keyword(s):  
Social Influence ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Scientific Discipline ◽  
Ethical Review ◽  
Ethical Guidelines ◽  
Human Welfare ◽  
Ethical Decisions ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Ethical Review Process ◽  
Privacy And Confidentiality

Social influence researchers encounter a variety of ethical issues in the conduct of their investigations, including those involving deception, privacy, and confidentiality. Facing a growing array of ethical guidelines, governmental regulations, and institutional review, researchers are faced with decisions that often pit the search for scientific knowledge against human welfare. Ethical decisions pertaining to social influence research methodology can have an impact on research participants, organizations, the scientific discipline, and society in general. This chapter surveys ethical issues in the conduct of laboratory, field, online, and applied research; describes remedial efforts (e.g., debriefing) to mitigate adverse research effects; and considers the nature of the ethical review process.

Institutional conflict of interest: attempting to crack the deferiprone mystery

2020 ◽  
pp. medethics-2019-105498
Author(s):  
Arthur Schafer
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Of Interest ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Mission Statement ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
First Line ◽  
Harm Minimisation ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Explanatory Hypothesis ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
Institutional Conflict

A recent study by Olivieri et al, published in PLOS ONE, reports that between 2009 and 2015 a third of patients with thalassaemia in Canada’s largest hospital were switched from first-line licensed drugs to regimens of deferiprone, an unlicensed drug of unproven safety and efficacy. Based on retrospective data from patient records, the PLOS Study reports that patients treated with deferiprone, either as monotherapy or in combination with first-line drugs, suffered serious (and often irreversible) adverse effects. The data reported by Olivieri et al give rise to a number of ethical issues. These ethical issues are identified, placed in historical context and analysed. For purposes of this analysis, reliance is placed on two core principles of research ethics, harm minimisation and informed consent, and also on the hospital’s mission statement. Then a mystery is explored: How and why did it happen that Toronto’s University Health Network treated large numbers of patients with an unlicensed drug over a period of many years? ‘Institutional conflict of interest’ is considered as a possible explanatory hypothesis.

Pediatric Research and the Return of Individual Research Results

2011 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 593-604 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denise Avard ◽  
Karine Sénécal ◽  
Parvaz Madadi ◽  
Daniel Sinnett
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Of Interest ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Pediatric Research ◽  
Best Interest ◽  
Vulnerable Group ◽  
Potential Conflict ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Ethical Duty ◽  
Individual Research Results

As a matter of respect for the person, it is considered an ethical duty to offer to return research results to participants where appropriate. Nevertheless, the return of individual research results to participants raises many socio-ethical issues and greater challenges when the participant is a child. This discrepancy arises partly because the return of individual pediatric research results entails a tripartite relationship between researcher, child, and parent(s) and is embroiled in numerous considerations (e.g., acting in the best interest of the child, respect for the person, and respect for the autonomy of the parents/child).Extra caution is required in the pediatric research context because children cannot generally decide (consent) whether they want to be informed of their own research results or whether the results should be disclosed to parents. Children have long been considered a special and vulnerable group, and their parents, as guardians, play a critical role in the consent process. However, with regards to the return of individual research results, this might pose a potential conflict of interest between the current or future desires of the child and those of the parents.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document