Developing a Framework for Assessing Responsible Conduct of Research Education Programs

Education in the responsible conduct of research (RCR) in the United States has evolved over the past decade from targeting trainees to including educational efforts aimed at faculty and staff. In addition RCR education has become more focused as federal agencies have moved to recommend specific content and to mandate education in certain areas. RCR education has therefore become a research-compliance issue necessitating the development of policies and the commitment of resources to develop or expand systems for educating faculty and staff and for assuring compliance. These changes implied the need to develop a program evaluation model that could be applied to institutional RCR education programs, which were expected to differ from traditional academic credit-bearing courses targeting trainees. Information gleaned from the examination of corporate compliance models was analyzed in order to create a program evaluation module that could be used to document and assess educational programs focused on teaching RCR. A programmed series of questions for each of the nine RCR content areas identified by the United States Office of Research Integrity was created based on a performance-monitoring evaluation model. The questions focus on educational goals, resources provided to support the educational efforts, educational content, content delivery, educational outcomes, compliance requirements and feedback. Answers collected in response to the questions could be used to both document and continually improve the quality of RCR educational programs through on-going formative assessment and feedback.     

Responsible Conduct of Human Subjects Research in Islamic Communities

Science and Engineering Ethics - In order to increase understanding of the ethical implications of biomedical, behavioral and clinical research, the Fogarty International Center, part of the United...     

Promoting Responsible Research Conduct: A South African Perspective

A great deal of effort has gone into developing capacity in the sphere of human research protection programmes in South Africa and Africa over the last decade or more, by several international organisations. However the promotion of the broader agenda of research integrity or ‘RCR’ (Responsible Conduct of Research) has lagged behind. From a global perspective South Africa and other African countries are actively involved in research endeavours and collaborations across a very broad spectrum of scientific fields. For this research to fulfil its potential social value it must be reliable and trustworthy and hence it is essential that research institutions and universities take the promotion of research integrity seriously. The purpose of this paper is to consider the role of an institutional office of research integrity within the context of academic research particularly in South Africa but also in Africa. I will reflect on my own experience over a period of five years as a research integrity officer at a South African academic institution to highlight concerns in five domains; the promotion of an ethic of responsibility in opposition to compliance and bureaucracy, collaboration ethics and collegiality especially in the context of North-South collaborations, authorship and publication ethics, the problem of plagiarism and the utility of policy and procedure. I will suggest that the establishment of such an office can be of great value in the promotion of a broad culture of research ethics and responsible research conduct. The possible role and scope of function of an institutional office of research integrity will be briefly outlined.     

Responsible Conduct of Research Training and Trust Between Research Postgraduate Students and Supervisors

The federal regulations of human research were written to permit the use of discretion so that research can fit the circumstances under which it is conducted. For example, the researcher and institutional review board (IRB) could waive or alter some informed consent elements if they deem this the morally and scientifically best way to conduct the research. To do so, however, researchers and IRBs would first have to use mature moral and scientific judgment. They might also have to rely on empirical research to discover the most effective way to act on their moral sense (e.g., to discover how best to approach potential research participants and explain the nature and purpose of the research participation for which they are being recruited, to ensure comprehension and competent decision making). On discovering the most ethical way to proceed, they would then need to look to the federal regulations of human research to discover how to document their decision and justify it within that somewhat flexible regulatory structure. Unfortunately, many IRBs and researchers fail to take these sensible steps to solve ethical problems and proceed immediately to a default requirement of the regulations that places science at odds with the regulations and, ostensibly, with ethics. The following articles in this special issue are about the process of learning to engage in ethical problem solving and using the flexibility permitted by the federal regulations. These articles extricate researchers from the mindset that has gotten them into trouble, and, ideally, provoke them to use mature common sense and moral judgment.     

A New Method for a Virtue-Based Responsible Conduct of Research Curriculum: Pilot Test Results

Science and Engineering Ethics - Drawing on Pennock’s theory of scientific virtues, we are developing an alternative curriculum for training scientists in the responsible conduct of research...     

A Qualitative Approach to Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) Training Development: Identification of Metacognitive Strategies

Although Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) training is common in the sciences, the effectiveness of RCR training is open to question. Three key factors appear to be particularly important in ensuring the effectiveness of ethics education programs: (1) educational efforts should be tied to day-to-day practices in the field, (2) educational efforts should provide strategies for working through the ethical problems people are likely to encounter in day-to-day practice, and (3) educational efforts should be embedded in a broader program of on-going career development efforts. This article discusses a complex qualitative approach to RCR training development, based on a sensemaking model, which strives to address the afore-mentioned training concerns. Ethnographic observations and prior RCR training served the purpose of collecting information specific to a multi-disciplinary and multi-university research center with the goal of identifying metacognitive reasoning strategies that would facilitate ethical decision-making. The extensive qualitative analyses resulted in the identification of nine metacognitive reasoning strategies on which future RCR training will be developed. The implications of the findings for RCR training in the sciences are discussed.     

Overview: Underserved Areas of Education in the Responsible Conduct of Research: Authorship

In February of 2007, the Responsible Conduct of Research Education Committee of the Association for Practical and Professional Ethics convened a mini-conference at the Association’s annual meeting. The purpose of the mini-conference was to examine underserved areas of education in research ethics. The mini-conference consisted of panel discussions for two topics: authorship and social responsibility. Representatives from diverse academic disciplines were invited to participate in each of the two panels. This Special Section of Science and Engineering Ethics consists of the papers based on presentations in the authorship panel. The papers illustrate similarities and differences in authorship and publication practices in various disciplines including engineering, the life sciences, and the social sciences.     

Modeling the Instructional Effectiveness of Responsible Conduct of Research Education: A Meta-Analytic Path-Analysis

Predictive modeling in education draws on data from past courses to forecast the effectiveness of future courses. The present effort sought to identify such a model of instructional effectiveness in scientific ethics. Drawing on data from 235 courses in the responsible conduct of research (RCR), structural equation modeling techniques were used to test a predictive model of RCR course effectiveness. Fit statistics indicated the model fit the data well, with the instructional characteristics included in the model explaining approximately 85% of the variance in RCR instructional effectiveness. Implications for using the model to develop and improve future RCR courses are discussed.     

Responsible Conduct by Life Scientists in an Age of Terrorism

The potential for dual use of research in the life sciences to be misused for harm raises a range of problems for the scientific community and policy makers. Various legal and ethical strategies are being implemented to reduce the threat of the misuse of research and knowledge in the life sciences by establishing a culture of responsible conduct.     

Teaching Responsible Research and Innovation: A Phronetic Perspective

Science and Engineering Ethics - Across the European research area and beyond, efforts are being mobilized to align research and innovation processes and products with societal values and needs,...     

Measures of Mentoring,Department Climate,and Graduate Student Preparedness in the Responsible Conduct of Psychological Research

Drawing upon two independent national samples of 201 and 241 psychology graduate students, this article describes the development and psychometric evaluation of 4 Web-based student self-report scales tapping student socialization in the responsible conduct of research (RCR) with human participants. The Mentoring the Responsible Conduct of Research Scale (MRCR) is composed of 2 subscales assessing RCR instruction and modeling by research mentors. The 2 subscales of the RCR Department Climate Scale (RCR-DC) assess RCR department policies and faculty and student RCR practices. The RCR Preparedness scale (RCR-P) and the RCR Field Integrity scale (RCR-FI) measure respectively students' confidence in their ability to conduct research responsibly and their belief in the RCR integrity of psychology as a discipline. Factor analysis, coefficient alphas, correlations, and multiple regression analyses demonstrated each of the scales had good internal consistency and concurrent and construct validity.     

Graduate Socialization in the Responsible Conduct of Research: A National Survey on the Research Ethics Training Experiences of Psychology Doctoral Students

Little is known about the mechanisms by which psychology graduate programs transmit responsible conduct of research (RCR) values. A national sample of 968 current students and recent graduates of mission-diverse doctoral psychology programs completed a Web-based survey on their research ethics challenges, perceptions of RCR mentoring and department climate, whether they were prepared to conduct research responsibly, and whether they believed psychology as a discipline promotes scientific integrity. Research experience, mentor RCR instruction and modeling, and department RCR policies predicted student RCR preparedness. Mentor RCR instruction, department RCR policies, and faculty modeling of RCR behaviors predicted confidence in the RCR integrity of the discipline. Implications for training are discussed.     

The Need for a Code of Conduct for Research Funders

Science and Engineering Ethics - In addition to a code of conduct for researchers, it is desirable to implement a code of conduct for funders of research. This is because researchers often behave...     

责任型领导：概念变迁、理论机制及本土启示

随着社会与环境问题的日益严峻, 责任型领导这个研究主题逐渐引起了学界的关注与探讨。观其发展历史, 责任型领导的概念界定主要历经了关系视角、过程视角和行为视角的变迁, 实证研究主要涉及道德认同、情境强度、社会交换、社会学习、社会信息加工、情感事件和资本理论等视角。在中国情境下, 未来研究既可以遵循本位研究思路, 从差序格局特征、集体主义取向类型等视角进行探索, 也可采用客位研究思路, 对以往西方研究视角进行检验或升级, 如整合、对比或探讨适用条件。     

德国负责任科研及其对我国的启示

随着科学研究的逐步深入,科研不端丑闻在全球范围内频繁出现,并成为各国政府和社会的关注焦点。作为科学研究的重要阵地,德国联邦政府、科学研究机构、高等学校以及主流媒体就应如何负责任的科研、怎样构建科研诚信体系进行了讨论,并形成一系列科研诚信“行为准则”。这些准则的发布和实施在一定程度上推动了德国科学研究的健康发展。文章在剖析德国如何负责任科研的基础上,对我国科研诚信的发展进行了反思,并提出了可行性建议。

     

Responsible Reporting: Neuroimaging News in the Age of Responsible Research and Innovation

Besides offering opportunities in both clinical and non-clinical domains, the application of novel neuroimaging technologies raises pressing dilemmas. ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’ (RRI) aims to stimulate research and innovation activities that take ethical and social considerations into account from the outset. We previously identified that Dutch neuroscientists interpret “responsible innovation” as educating the public on neuroimaging technologies via the popular press. Their aim is to mitigate (neuro)hype, an aim shared with the wider emerging RRI community. Here, we present results of a media-analysis undertaken to establish whether the body of articles in the Dutch popular press presents balanced conversations on neuroimaging research to the public. We found that reporting was mostly positive and framed in terms of (healthcare) progress. There was rarely a balance between technology opportunities and limitations, and even fewer articles addressed societal or ethical aspects of neuroimaging research. Furthermore, neuroimaging metaphors seem to favour oversimplification. Current reporting is therefore more likely to enable hype than to mitigate it. How can neuroscientists, given their self-ascribed social responsibility, address this conundrum? We make a case for a collective and shared responsibility among neuroscientists, journalists and other stakeholders, including funders, committed to responsible reporting on neuroimaging research.     

Interactive Genetic Counseling Role-Play: A Novel Educational Strategy for Family Physicians

Background Family physicians (FPs) are increasingly involved in delivering genetic services. Familiarization with aspects of genetic counseling may enable FPs to help patients make informed choices. Purpose Exploration of interactive role-play as a means to raise FPs’ awareness of the process and content of genetic counseling. Methods FPs attending two large Canadian family medicine conferences in 2005 were eligible—93 participated. FPs discussed a case during a one-on-one session with a genetic counselor. Evaluation involved pre and post intervention questionnaires Results FPs’ baseline genetic knowledge was self-rated as uniformly poor. Baseline confidence was highest in eliciting family history and providing psychosocial support and lowest in discussing risks/benefits of genetic testing and counseling process. Post-intervention, 80% of FPs had better appreciation of family history and 97% indicated this was an effective learning experience. Conclusions Role-play with FPs is effective in raising awareness of the process and content of genetic counseling and may be applied to other health disciplines. This research was funded by: The Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Institute of Genetics, The Genetics Education Project (funded by the Ontario Women’s Health Council), and GeneSens (funded by a CIHR Interdisciplinary Capacity Enhancement Team Grant).