Format-1(a) (in PowerPoint)

Disclaimer:

©This PowerPoint presentation and

the video contents transmitted solely
belongs to VTU e-Learning Centre
and is copyright protected.
Intellectual honesty is honesty in the acquisition,
analysis, and transmission of ideas , Role &
Responsibilities of Researchers, Organizations, in
research integrity, Professionalism, etc.,
Intellectual honesty and research
integrity
 What is Research ?
Ø The word research itself is a combination of “re” and “search,” which is meant
by a systematic investigation to gain new knowledge from already existing
facts.
Ø Research may be defined as a scientific understanding of existing knowledge
and deriving new knowledge to be applied for the betterment of the mankind.
Ø Research is defined as an undertaking intended to extend knowledge through
a disciplined enquiry or systematic investigation
Ø It is a systematic methodological scientific approach for basic facts around a
certain problem in order to find solutions based on these facts.
Ø The significant contribution of research deals with the progress of the nation
as well as an individual with commercial, social, and educational advantages.
 What is Research ?
Ø Research is an important parameter to judge the development of any nation

Ø According to Wernher von

Braun (a German
philosopher), “Research is
what I’m doing when I don’t
know what I’m doing.” It is
Albert Szent Gyorgyi
basically the search for
(Hungarian Bio-
chemist, Nobel Prize 1937) truth/facts.
Ø According to Clifford Woody (American philosopher, 1939), “Research
comprises of defining and redefining problems, formulating the
hypothesis for suggested solutions, collecting, organizing and
evaluating data, making deductions and reaching conclusion and further
testing the conclusion whether they fit into formulating the hypothesis.
 Why Research???
Create New
Knowledge
Degree

RESEARCH Career
Validate Existing
Knowledge

Problem Appointment
Solving
Promotion
New
Technology/Process/Product
Expert

Branding
Socio-Economic
Development
Research
 STAGES OF THE RESEARCH
Ø Selecting the research topic PROCESS
Ø Carrying out the literature survey
Ø Finding out the research gaps
Ø Specifying the research objectives
Ø Developing the research plan
Ø Design of experiments
Ø Procurement of required chemicals for the research
Ø Carrying out the experiments
Ø Characterizations and accumulation of data
Ø Analysis of the data
Ø Interpretation of data
Ø Writing the report
Ø Analysis of the data
Ø Interpretation of data
Ø Writing the report
Ø Submission of manuscript/thesis
 Publish or Perish (POP)
Ø Publish or perish’ (POP) is a phrase that describes the pressure put on academics
to publish in scholarly journals rapidly and continually as a condition for
employment (finding a job), promotion, and even maintaining one’s job.

Ø POP may be advocated on the grounds that a good track record in publications
brings attention to the authors and their institutions, which can facilitate continued
funding and the progress of the authors themselves.

Ø The POP culture has led to a relentless quest for publications – the sole objective
being CV building rather than the advancement of human knowledge.

Ø One perceived benefit of the POP model is that some pressure to produce
research is necessary to motivate academics early in their careers to focus on
research advancement and learn to balance research activity with other
responsibilities.
EVOLUTION IN ACADEMIA
 STEPS INVOLVED IN PUBLISHING

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

Journal editor receives it

Scientists study & sends it out for peer
something review
Editor sends review
comments who may
revise and resubmit. He
may reject it if there no Peer reviewers
novelty and is of not high evaluate it &
scientific standards send their
Scientists prepare feedback to the
the manuscript editor

If a manuscript meets the

editorial and peer standards, it
is then published in the journal
What makes a good paper?

Every paper must have at

least one clear key idea that
advances knowledge
Success in Research
Success
 Engage in
Unethical
Research /
Misconduct
Position

Monetary Awards
 Breach of
Privacy of
subjects Publication
Conflict of Misconduct
Interest

Unethical
Animal
Cruelty Research Dishonesty
Practices
Sampling
Error
Subjective

Racism Discrimination
 Intellectual Honesty
Ø Intellectual honesty in proposing, performing, and reporting research
refers to honesty with respect to the meaning of one's research.
Ø It is expected that researchers present proposals and data honestly and
communicate their best understanding of the work in writing and
verbally.
Ø Harvard ethicist Louis M. Guenin describes the "kernel" of intellectual
honesty to be "a virtuous disposition to eschew deception when given an
incentive for deception“.
Ø Intentionally committed fallacies and deception in debates and reasoning
are called intellectual dishonesty. We have a moral duty to be honest.
This duty is especially important when we share ideas that can inform or
persuade others.
Ø William Frankena (American Philosopher, 1973) defined ethics as a branch
of philosophy that deals with thinking about morality, moral problems, and
judgments of proper conduct.

Ø The word ethics is derived from the Greek word ethos (meaning a person’s
character, nature, or disposition).

Ø It has been defined in the Oxford English Dictionary (1936) as relating to

morals or, more specifically, “of or pertaining to the distinction between
right and wrong

Ø Ethical problems can pertain to the ethics of science (the protection of the
integrity of data) or the ethics of research (the protection of human rights).
Ø The ethics of science deals with normative rules that
protect the integrity of data.

Ø Conversely, the ethics of research is related to the means

and social consequences of the discovery of scientific
truths; an unethical judgment can thereby undermine the
rights of research participants through the methods used,
or society at large through the implications of the research
findings.
 Characteristics of Ethical Problems
• The complexity of a single research problem can give rise to
multiple questions of proper behavior;
• Sensitivity to ethical issues is necessary but not sufficient for
solving them;
• Ethical problems are the results of conflicting values;
• Ethical problems can relate to both the subject matter of the
research and the conduct of the research;
• An adequate understanding of an ethical problem sometimes
requires a broad perspective based on the consequences of
research;
•
• Ethical problems involve both personal and professional
elements;

• Ethical problems can pertain to science and to research;

• Judgments about proper conduct lie on a continuum ranging from

the clearly unethical to the clearly ethical;

• An ethical problem can be encountered as a result of a decision

to conduct a particular study or a decision not to conduct the study.
Ø It is not only academic institutions but also
governmental research institutions/ organizations that
suffer from scientific ethical violence.

Ø The main violation that occurred is that scientists are

failing to disclose the potential conflicts of interest.

Ø The modern form of data manipulation is also the

major problem of scientific ethical violence in
research
 INTELLECTUAL HONESTY
§ We have a moral duty to be honest. This duty
is especially important when we share ideas
that can inform or persuade others. Intellectual
honesty is honesty in the acquisition, analysis,
and transmission of ideas.

§ A person is being intellectually honest when he

or she, knowing the truth, states that truth.

§ For the individual scientist, integrity embodies

above all a commitment to intellectual honesty
and personal responsibility for one’s actions
and to a range of practices that characterize
responsible research conduct.
 Common forms of intellectual
dishonesty
• Plagiarism—the wrongful appropriation of others language,
thought, ideas, or expressions,

• Selective Reporting—Selecting a n d r e p o r t i n g o n l y t h e
information that supports a single point of view or conclusion.
This includes publication bias, media bias, and various forms
of censorship.

• Disinformation—spreading false information with the intent to

deceive.
• Fabrication, including falsifying data—incorrectly reporting
results or selectively omitting data in an attempt to prove a
hypothesis or to support a position.
• Logical fallacies—errors in reasoning often go unrecognized
and unchallenged.
• Applying double standards—using different sets of principles
for similar situations
• Using false analogies—making unsound comparisons,
• Exaggeration and overgeneralization—stating an inductive
generalization based on insufficient evidence,
• Presenting straw man arguments—giving the impression of
refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an
argument that was not presented by that opponent,
• Poisoning the well—sharing irrelevant or untrue adverse
information about the presenter,
• Quoting out of context—removing a passage from its surroundin
matter in such a way as to distort its intended meaning,
• Bias—Silently omitting, suppressing, excluding, or discounting
evidence or viewpoints contrary to the argument you are making
or the ideology you are defending. Bias is a failure to
remain objective and maintain a neutral point of view.
• Statistical Bias—Drawing conclusions from an
unrepresentative sample.
• Cherry picking—pointing to individual cases or data that
appear to confirm a particular position while ignoring a
significant portion of related cases or data that may
contradict that position.
• Half-truths—making a deceptive statement that includes
some element of truth,
• Data Dredging—presenting patterns uncovered in data as
being statistically significant without first devising a specific
hypothesis as to the underlying causality.
 Embracing Intellectual Honesty
• At its core, intellectual honesty requires students, academics,
and researchers to be transparent about the sources of their
ideas and to acknowledge the contributions of others in their
writing.
• This basic principle forms a foundation for acquiring and
developing knowledge. Because knowledge is typically
cumulative, further advances are predicated on the
contributions of others.
• Within systems of scholarship, such contributions are critically
evaluated before being used as a foundation for further inquiry.
• Intellectual honesty is essential to ensure that intellectual
contributions are transparent and open to critique.

• Acting with intellectual integrity begins with recognizing

the expected standards of honesty

• Intellectual honesty is one of the core values of the

professional education,
Ø To create a strong paper that evidences scholarly integrity,
you will synthesize the work of a number of individuals,
express their ideas in your own words, and credit them
accurately.
Ø When you present your own ideas or opinions, you will
provide evidence to substantiate your position by drawing
on the professional literature.
Ø Graduate students are considered to be responsible
scholars and are, therefore, expected to adhere rigorously
to the principles of intellectual integrity.
Ø Deliberate deceit in reporting information, ideas, and
research is clearly unacceptable;

Ø However, there can be other, less obvious, forms of

intellectual dishonesty for which you can be held
accountable.

Ø Each of the common pitfalls (below) are considered forms

of plagiarism, even if you engage in them unintentionally.
 Failure to Cite the Sources of Ideas
Ø One of the most common pitfalls into which students fall, in
terms of scholarly integrity, is not providing citations for the
sources of their ideas.
Ø The bottom line is transparency. You must make it crystal clear
to the reader whose idea you are presenting.

Ø For each of the key points and subpoints in your paper, you
must provide the proper citation for the sources of your
information.
Ø When you draw information from someone else, please be
very careful to (a) present the ideas in your own words, and
(b) cite the source accurately.

Ø If you make a statement that most people would consider

common knowledge, you do not need a citation (e.g.,
“Canada and the United States share a common border”).
However, other types of substantive statements in your
paper must be supported with sources taken from the
professional literature
• The following examples demonstrate writing using
insufficient citations, which is a form of plagiarism.

• You make the following statements and provide no

citation for them: “The therapeutic relationship has
emerged as one of the most important factors in
effective counselling,” or “There is little evidence that
vaccination alone can account for all of the variance in
health outcomes.” This information is not something
that you would know without drawing on the work of
others, so you must provide an appropriate citation.
Ø You copy a phrase, sentence, or larger portion from a source,
and you fail to include both quotation marks and the proper
citation. For example, you might write, “Nurse practitioners
should attend to the principles of assessment and triage for
specific presenting concerns.” The portion underlined is word-
for-word from one of your sources. Including that phrase
without using quotation marks and citing the source is
considered plagiarism even though you did not copy the whole
sentence.
Ø You draw an idea from someone and fail to cite the source
of that idea, even if you have carefully paraphrased the
idea (i.e., you have used your own words, but not your
own idea).
Ø For example, you summarize the work of Jerry (2019), or
you write down in your own words what you learned from
both Jerry (2019) and Nuttgens (2018), but you do not cite
them. Even though you have used your own words, these
are not your ideas; therefore, not citing them constitutes
plagiarism.
Ø You provide an incorrect source for a direct quotation (i.e.,
word-for-word excerpt) or a paraphrase. You make the
following statement, and you cite Jerry (2019), when it was
actually Nuttgens (2018) who made the statement: “There
is little evidence that counselling theory alone can account
for all of the variance in success rates” (Jerry, 2019). This
may happen, because of the use of secondary sources, or
because you have not kept careful track of the sources of
your information. Regardless of the cause, this too is
considered plagiarism.
Ø If you are providing your own opinion or pulling out the
themes from various sources you have already described,
then be sure to indicate clearly that this is what you are
doing: “Based on the analysis provided above, I have
identified three themes that reflect current trends in the
literature.” In this case, you don’t need to include all of your
sources again, but you must ensure that this is your own
synthesis and that the sources are documented in the
section you are summarizing.
 Exhibiting Academic Integrity and Intellectual Honesty
Plagiarizing the Work of Others

Misusing Secondary Sources

Plagiarizing Your Own Work
Discerning When and How to Cite Others
Embracing Intellectual Honesty

https://pressbooks.pub/professionalwriting2/chapter/chapter_2/
 Failure to Properly Paraphrase Information
Copying an Entire Paper (or Portions Thereof)
Ø You are always expected to complete your own work, unless
assignments have been set up specifically for group work. This
does not mean that you cannot solicit feedback from an
instructor to incorporate into your assignment, have a colleague
proofread your work before you submit it, or consult with peers
on ideas and expectations. It simply means that your work is
your work. Consider the following examples of plagiarism:
Ø You copy someone else’s paper for your entire assignment.

Ø You copy sections of another student’s paper or a journal article.

Ø You submit a document (or a portion of a document) when other

people have contributed to the creation of that work.

Ø Instructors have many tools available to them to detect this type

of intellectual dishonesty, including plagiarism detection software.
 Plagiarizing Your Own Work
Ø In addition to diligently tracking and making transparent the
information you draw on from other people, you must be
careful to avoid self-plagiarism in your professional writing.

Ø Typically self-plagiarism occurs when a student submits a

previous assignment, in whole or in part, in lieu of creating a
new piece of writing.
 Resubmitting Previous Coursework
Ø Submitting previous course work in another course or in another
assignment may seem like an obvious “Don’t do it!” from an intellectual
honesty perspective, but it can be a bit more complicated to discern
what this means in practical terms.

Ø You might not want to reinvent the wheel completely every time you
write a paper, particularly if you have an emergent area of professional
interest. For example, if you are curious about the social determinants
of health, or more specifically, you want to specialize in the area of
domestic violence, you would be wise to start gathering information on
this topic from the very beginning of your program
Ø One has to resist focusing every single assignment on the
same topic, because it will limit your learning.

Ø However, you may pick certain assignments throughout the

program to use as a way of building your knowledge and
expertise in the area. If you do this in a strategic way, you will
have a foundation to build upon for writing your thesis, project,
or final paper at the end of your program.
Ø The problem is that you cannot take the same paragraphs and
simply plug them into different assignments, or tweak them only
slightly for different courses.
Ø Submitting work that you completed in one course, in whole or in
part, for another course assignment is considered cheating, even
if you credit yourself to avoid charges of plagiarism.
Ø This includes taking an assignment from another course (even if
that course was taken in another program) and editing it to
resubmit for your current course;
Ø lifting sections from one assignment and including them in another
assignment; and resubmitting a previously graded assignment
from the same course, if you repeat that course for some reason.
Each assignment is designed to build specific
competencies, and you are expected to submit a
new piece of academic work for each one. It is
your responsibility to ensure that the content was
created specifically for the particular assignment,
and in the course you are taking currently. You can
certainly draw on the same sources and ideas, but
you must create a new and original document.
 Building Toward Culminating
Experiences
Ø Most graduate programs culminate in a final project, thesis, or
other course-based exit process in which students are expected
to demonstrate what they have learned about the theories and
practices within the field of health disciplines as well as their
competencies in professional writing and ethical scholarship.
Ø Although you are expected to avoid self-plagiarism in course
assignments, it is efficient and strategic to build toward your
culminating experience throughout your program.
Ø The bottom line is that the culminating activity in your graduate
program must represent a new and original piece of work.
Ø Faculty who do research and writing as part of their ongoing professional work face a similar
dilemma. Many choose a particular area of research and theoretical interest and continue to
develop their thinking and writing in that area for many years. However, they are bound by
these same ethical principles.

Ø They cannot simply rearrange one journal article to create another. The guidelines for almost
all journals explicitly require submission of an original piece of work. This does not mean that
the topic must be new to the author; it means that they have not made the same argument or
presented the same data in another publication. Instead they have presented new ideas and,
if applicable, have substantively rewritten or explicitly cited content drawn from previous work
to support their thesis in the new article.

Ø The art of not plagiarizing yourself is an essential skill for you to develop as part of your
professional development.
Facing the Consequences of Intellectual Dishonesty
Few learners deliberately attempt to present the work of another as their own or
purposefully engage in other forms of intellectual dishonesty. Most of the time,
learners new to academic writing expectations make honest mistakes, and
hopefully will receive the coaching and support they need to succeed. Those who
do choose to engage in intellectual dishonesty will likely tell you that it is not worth
the embarrassment or the academic consequences. There is a zero tolerance
policy in most universities for plagiarism and other forms of academic misconduct,
and the academic consequences, and potential career implications, are very
serious. The AU Student Academic Misconduct Policy provides an example of
the potential consequences of plagiarism and other academic offences. As a
learner your will be held accountable to the principles outlined in your university
policies, as well as other guidelines provided specifically by your department or
program. Please raise any questions you have with a course instructor or your
faculty mentor.
Misusing Secondary Sources
An original source is the author(s) who first makes a statement, introduces a concept,
reports on research, or presents a new idea. Sometimes this original source is cited within
the text of an article or book you read. This makes that article or book you read a
secondary source for the statement, concept, research, or idea. A secondary source
provides a second-hand account of information from the primary source. So, for example,
Mules (2020) described a study conducted by Nuttgens (2017). Mules is a secondary
source of information; Nuttgens is the original source. Using Mules as your source, rather
than reading and citing Nuttgens, is like relying on hearsay in court, and it is a breach of
academic integrity. You cannot state for sure what Nuttgens said unless you actually read
their work. Otherwise, you are taking Mules’ word for what Nuttgens had to say. You may
later discover that Mules did not correctly represent Nuttgens’ views. You have then
become responsible for passing on that misrepresentation. In addition, you put yourself at
risk of plagiarism and other breaches of scholarly integrity that may have occurred in the
secondary source you read.
It might also be argued that it is logical to reuse the same figure throughout a single
publication. A researcher is allowed to mention and/or reuse prior results, such as an
image, in a subsequent research paper, provided that enough new research is also
reported that either builds upon the research previously reported or shows it in a new
light and it is properly referenced. So far as the graph or the figure is concern, no
specific feature within an image may be enhanced, obscured, moved, removed, or
introduced. The groupings of images from different parts of the same gel, or from
different gels, fields, or exposures must be made explicit by the arrangement of the
figure (using dividing lines) and in the text of the figure legend. Adjustments of
brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if
 What is Research Integrity?
Ø Research integrity is another name
for ‘good research practice’. It’s the
conduct of research in ways that
promote trust and confidence in all
aspects of the research process.
Ø Research integrity covers all research and
the whole lifecycle, from the initial idea and
design of the project through the conduct of
the research and its dissemination. It also
covers making sure that environments and
systems for research safeguard and
enhance good research practice, rather than
hinder it – often described as ‘research
culture‘.
 Research integrity
Ø Research integrity may be defined as active adherence to the ethical principles and
professional standards essential for the responsible practice of research
Ø By active adherence we mean adoption of the principles and practices as a personal
credo, not simply accepting them as impositions by rule makers.
Ø By ethical principles we mean honesty, the golden rule, trustworthiness, and high
regard for the scientific record.
Ø Integrity characterizes both individual researchers and the institutions in which they
work, it is a matter of creating an environment that promotes responsible conduct by
embracing standards of excellence, trustworthiness, and lawfulness that inform
institutional practices.
Ø For individuals research integrity is an aspect of moral character and experience. It
involves above all a commitment to intellectual honesty and personal responsibility
for one’s actions and to a range of practices that characterize responsible research
conduct.
 Research Integrity Definition
• Research integrity means conducting research in such a way that
allows others to have confidence and trust in the methods and the
findings of the research .
• It relates both to the scientific integrity of conducted research and to
the professional integrity of researchers.
• Research integrity can be defined as the “trustworthiness of research
due to the soundness of its methods and the honesty and accuracy of
its presentation.
• Research integrity broadly refers to the thoughtful and honest and
accuracy of its presentation.
• Research integrity broadly refers to the thoughtful and honest
adherence to relevant ethical, disciplinary, and financial standards in
the promotion, design, conduct, evaluation, and sharing of research.
Principles of Research Integrity
Honesty

Reliability

Fairness

Impartiality & Independence

Open communication

High standards of mentorship & supervision

Duty of care for participants

Awareness of responsibilities to society

Robust research methodologies

 Difference between integrity and honesty
§ Integrity refers to doing the right thing at all times. A difference that can be
identified between honesty & integrity is that while honesty pertains to the
truth in a persons words, actions and even thoughts, integrity goes a step
further.

• A person with integrity does the right things as a principle that guides him.

• Research carried out with a high level of integrity upholds values of honesty,
rigour, transparency and open communication, as well as care & respect for
those involved in research & accountability for a positive research
environment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3jVp9YmrgU
 ARC of Research Integrity

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToNP-7OXvRQ
Fundamental Values of Research Integrity
 Good practices of research
integrity
• Intellectual honesty and fairness in proposing, performing,
and reporting research;
• Accuracy and fairness in representing contributions to
research proposals and reports;
• Proficiency and fairness in peer review;
• Collegiality in scientific interactions, communications, and
sharing of resources;
•
Ø Disclosure of conflicts of interest or potential conflicts
of interest;
Ø Protection of human subjects in the conduct of
research;
Ø Humane care of animals in the conduct of research;
Ø Adherence to the mutual responsibilities of mentors
and trainees
• Intellectual honesty and fairness in proposing, performing,
and reporting research;
• Accuracy and fairness in representing contributions to research
proposals and reports;
• Proficiency and fairness in peer review;
• Collegiality in scientific interactions, communications, and
sharing of resources;
• Protection of human subjects in the conduct of research;

• Humane care of animals in the conduct of research;

• Adherence to the mutual responsibilities of mentors and

trainees closure of conflicts of interest or potential conflicts
of interest
Ø In many respects scientists perform their professional
activities as a monopoly, licensed by society similar to doctors,
nurses, lawyers, hairdressers, accountants, and real estate
brokers.

Ø Besides providing their expertise, professionals are supposed

to behave collegially and teach the skills to others, and put
society’s needs first in their professional activity.

Ø In response, society gives them a great deal of autonomy in

conducting their professional lives.
Ø With scientists, that means selection of one’s own research
problems and methods of procedure.

Ø They also are given the responsibilities to allocate funding, and

review of their output in publications.

Ø Like other professions they are given responsibility for discipline

in the event of poor performance or malfeasance. When self-
regulation fails to sustain honesty and high quality, society
imposes rules and laws to maintain its interests in professional
quality
Main elements of professionalism
§ Intellectual honesty;
• Excellence in thinking and doing;
• Collegiality and openness;
• Autonomy and responsibility;
• Self-regulation.
Practical elements responsible for
research conduct
• Conducting and reporting research;
• Role of the hypothesis;
• Critical nature of experimental design;
• The tentativeness of conclusions;
• Skepticism and humility tempered with conviction;
• Dealing with surprises serendipity communicating with
colleagues;
• Communicating with the community-media.
 Social responsibilities of
scientists/researchers as an oath (kent)
• Is it appropriate to consider the broader consequences of the
pursuit of a scientific question?
• I just make discoveries about nature; others use my discoveries
for better or worse.
• I must consider the predictable consequences of my research and
decide in advance if I will create serious ethical problems as a
result of its outcomes.
• It matters not that others might discover what I avoid seeking
because of its consequences. I do not have to contribute to the
misfortune of humanity in my research.
Ø The true consequences of a research effort are impossible to
predict and it is the height of arrogance not to pursue a
promising avenue of science just because of qualms about its
misuse.

Ø How do I design and interpret my work not to bias the

conclusions?

Ø Do scientists have the responsibility to make every effort to

enter their work into the scientific record whether it is positive
or negative?
• Integrity in research is essential for maintaining scientific
excellence and for keeping the public’s trust.

• Integrity characterizes both individual researchers and the

institutions in which they work. The concept of integrity in
research cannot, however, be reduced to a one-line definition.

• For a scientist, integrity embodies above all the individual’s

commitment to intellectual honesty and personal responsibility.
•
• It is an aspect of moral character and experience.
Ø For an institution, it is a commitment to creating an
environment that promotes responsible conduct by
embracing standards of excellence, trustworthiness, and
lawfulness and then assessing whether researchers and
administrators perceive that an environment with high
levels of integrity has been created.
 Environment and Bases of Research
Integrity
• The research environment changes continually, and these changes
influence the culture and conduct of research.

• As with any system being scientifically examined, the research

environment itself contains variables and constants.

§ The most unpredictable and influential variable is the individual

scientist.
 §The human contribution to the research environment is greatly
shaped by each individual’s professional integrity, which in turn
is influenced by that individual’s educational background and
cultural and ethical upbringing and the resulting values and
attitudes that contribute to identity formation, unique personality
traits, and ethical decision-making abilities.

§ Institutions seeking to create an environment that promotes

responsible conduct by individual scientists and that fosters
integrity must establish and continuously monitor structures,
processes, policies, and procedures.
Ø Each individual researcher brings unique qualities to the
research environment, the constants must come from the
environment itself.

Ø Research institutions should consistently and effectively

provide training and education, policies and procedures, and
tools and support systems. Institutional expectations should be
unambiguous, and the consequences of one’s conduct should
be clear.
 Bases of research integrity
Individual Level (the individual scientist, integrity embodies above
all a commitment to intellectual honesty and personal responsibility
for one’s actions and to a range of practices that characterize the
responsible conduct of research) includes:
– intellectual honesty in proposing, performing, and reporting
research;
– accuracy in representing contributions to research proposals and
reports;
– fairness in peer review;
Ø collegiality in scientific interactions, including communications and
sharing of resources;

Ø transparency in conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of

interest;

Ø protection of human subjects in the conduct of research;

Ø adherence to the mutual responsibilities between investigators

and their research teams.
 Institutional Level
Institutional Level (institutions seeking to create an environment that promotes
responsible conduct by individual scientists and that fosters integrity must
establish and
continuously monitor structures, processes, policies, and procedures) that:
– provides leadership in support of responsible conduct of research;
– encourages respect for everyone involved in the research enterprise;
– promotes productive interactions between trainees and mentors;
– advocates adherence to the rules regarding all aspects of the conduct of
research,
especially research involving human participants and animals;
– anticipates, reveals, and manages individual and institutional conflicts of
interest;
– arranges timely and thorough inquiries and
investigations of allegations of scientific
misconduct and apply appropriate administrative
sanctions;
– offers educational opportunities pertaining to
integrity in the conduct of research;
– monitors and evaluates the institutional environment
supporting integrity in the conduct of research and
uses this knowledge for continuous quality
improvement.
 Promoting Integrity in Research
• Integrity in the research should be developed within the
context of other aspects of an
• overall research education program. The committee
may believe that doing so will be the best way to
accomplish the following five objectives for graduate
students and postdoctoral fellows
 Five objectives for students in promoting integrity
in research
Ø emphasize responsible conduct as central to conducting good
science;
Ø maximize the likelihood that education in the responsible
conduct of research influences individuals and institutions rather
than merely satisfies an item on a checkoff list necessary for that
institution;
Ø impart essential rules and guidelines regarding responsible
conduct of research in one’s discipline and profession in context;
Ø enable participants in the educational programs to
develop abilities that will help them to effectively
manage concerns related to responsible conduct of
research that cannot be anticipated but that are
certain to arise in the future;

Ø verify that the first four objectives have been met.

 The model for providing instruction in the
responsible conduct of research
§ start as soon as the researchers arrive;
• make the instruction in this area part of everything they
do, placing the education in the context of the research
instead of making it a separate entity;
• move from the simple to the complex;
• assess student competency;
• communicating well;
 Funding agencies
• Funding agencies should establish research grant programs to identify,
• measure, and assess those factors that influence integrity in research
• The Office of Research Integrity should broaden its current support for
research to fund studies that explore new approaches to monitoring and
evaluating the integrity of the research environment.
Public funding/government agencies and foundations that fund extramural
research should include in their funding portfolios support for research
designed to assess the factors that promote integrity in research across
different disciplines and institutions.
Public funding/government agencies and foundations should fund research
designed to assess the relationship between various elements of the
research environment and integrity in research, including similarities and
differences across disciplines and institutions.
 Research Institution
• Each research institution must develop and implement a
comprehensive program designed to promote integrity in research,
using multiple approaches adapted to the specific environments within
each institution:

• It is incumbent upon institutions to take a more active role in the

development and maintenance of climate and culture within their
research environments that promote and support the responsible
conduct of research.
• The factors within the research environment that institutions should
consider in the development and maintenance of such a culture and
climate include, but are not limited to, supportive leadership, appropriate
policies and procedures, effective educational programs, and evaluation of
any efforts devoted to fostering integrity in research.

• Federal research agencies and private foundations should work with

educational institutions to develop funding mechanisms to provide support for
programs that promote the responsible conduct of research.
Institutions should implement effective educational programs
that enhance the responsible conduct of research:

• Educational programs should be built around the development of

abilities that give rise to the responsible conduct of research.
• The design of programs should be guided by basic principles of adult
learning.
• Integrity in research should be developed within the context of other
relevant aspects of an overall research education program, and
instruction in the responsible conduct of research should be provided
by faculty who are actively engaged in research related to that of the
trainees.
 Evaluation by Self-Assessment
Ø Peer reviewers may be used in institutional self-assessment
processes; assessments done by peer reviewers may or may not be
associated with accreditation by external organizations/agencies.
Ø If institutional cultures have to be changed, then both the call for
change and its implementation must come from research institutions.
Ø An important next step might be for universities and university
associations, working together, to acknowledge the importance of
conducting research and research education in an environment of
high integrity and developing an evaluative process based on self-
study
 Institutional self-assessment of integrity in
research with existing accreditation processes
• Accreditation provides established procedures, including external peer review, that
can be modified to incorporate assessments of efforts related to integrity in
research within an institution.
• Entities that currently accredit educational programs at institutions where research
is conducted would be the bodies to also review the process and the outcome data
from the institution’s self-assessment of its climate for promotion of integrity in
research.
• Government research agencies and private foundations should support efforts to
integrate self-assessment of the research environment into existing accreditation
processes, and they also should fund research into the effectiveness of such efforts.
 Integrity of the individual research
Ø Intellectual Honesty in Proposing, Performing, and Reporting
Research
Ø Fairness in Peer Review
Ø Collegiality in Scientific Interactions, Including Communications
and Sharing of Resources
Ø Transparency in Conflicts of Interest or Potential Conflicts of
Interest
Ø Protection of Human Subjects in the Conduct of Research:
Ø Accuracy in Representing Contributions to Research
Proposals and Reports
Ø Humane Care of Animals in the Conduct of Research
Ø Adherence to the Mutual Responsibilities Between
Investigators and Entire Research Teams
Ø Mentoring and Advising:
 Support of Integrity by the
Research Institution
The vigor, resources, and attitudes with which institutions/organizations carry out
their responsibilities to influence investigator’s commitment and adherence to
responsible research practices are the following:
Ø To Provide Leadership in Support of Responsible Conduct of Research
Ø To Encourage Respect for Everyone Involved in the Research Enterprise
Ø To Promote Productive Interactions Between Trainees and Mentors:
Ø To Advocate Adherence to the Rules Regarding all Aspects of the Conduct of
Research, Especially Research Involving Human Subjects and Animal
Ø To Anticipate, Reveal, and Manage Individual and Institutional Conflicts of
Interest
Ø To Offer Educational Opportunities Pertaining to Integrity in the Conduct of
Research
Ø To Monitor and Evaluate the Institutional Environment Supporting Integrity in the
Conduct of Research and Use this Knowledge for Continuous Quality
Improvement
 Research Environment and Its Impact on
Research Integrity

The open-systems model depicts the various elements of

a social organization, these elements include the external
environment, the organizational divisions or departments,
the individuals comprising those divisions and the
reciprocal influences between the various organizational
elements and the external environment.
 Assumptions of the open-systems
model and its elements
Ø External conditions influence the inputs into an organization to affect the
reception of outputs from an organization’s activities and directly affect an
organization’s internal operations.
Ø All system elements and their subcomponent parts are interrelated to
influence one another in a multidirectional fashion.
Ø Any element or part of an organization can be viewed as a system in
itself.
Ø There is a feedback loop whereby the system outputs and outcomes are
used as system inputs over time with continual change occurring in the
organization
Ø Organizational structure and processes are in part
determined by the external environment and are influenced
by the dynamics between and among organizational
members.

Ø An organization’s success depends on its ability to adapt

to its environment, to tie individual members to their roles
and responsibilities within the organization, to conduct its
processes, and to manage its operations over time
A research organization should have explicit
procedures and systems in place to fairly: •
monitor and evaluate research performance, •
distribute the resources needed for research, •
reward achievement.
Research has shown that strongly implemented and
embedded ethical codes of conduct within
organizations are associated with ethical behavior in
the workplace by: • involving students in educating
their peers and resolving academic dishonesty
allegations, • treating academic integrity as a moral
issue, • promoting enhanced student-faculty contact
and better teaching.
 Fostering Integrity in Research
• A regulatory approach to fostering integrity in research is
consistent with other governmental efforts to encourage the
use of commonly accepted practices and to discourage
irresponsible behavior in the research environment.
• Researchers and institutional officials are familiar with
compliance requirements and often participate in the
preparation of rulemaking procedures.
A regulatory approach fostering integrity in research also has
some limitations.

Regulations emphasize the areas of common agreement and

can reduce important concerns to rules and procedures.

It is difficult or impossible for regulations alone to foster an

understanding of the critical issues involved, and the required
procedure
 Performance-based model
Ø A performance-based model for the evaluation of organizational efforts to
foster integrity in the research environment offers selected goals and
benchmarks that can be used as criteria to assess the success of efforts.
A benchmark is a standard or point of reference used in measuring
and/or judging quality or value.
Ø Benchmarking is the process of continuously comparing and measuring
an organization’s performance, practices, policies, and philosophies
against leading, high-performing organizations anywhere in the world to
gain information that will help the organization take action to improve its
performance. These goals and benchmarks are generally linked to
rewards, incentives, and, at times, penalties for specific types of behavior.
Ø publicizing and possibly sanctioning actions that are inconsistent with the
institution’s research mission.
The internal assessment and accreditation
process include the following points:
• institutional self-study;
• a team visit;
• types of accreditation actions;
• periodic review reports;
• institutional profile (annual) reports;
• candidacy and initial accreditation procedures;
• public information;
• use of technology & training of evaluators and the institution’s
departmental chairs.
Ø This model also requires institutions/ universities to implement these
goals through a series of actions and assessment strategies include
the following:
Ø posting the statement (including selected criteria related to personnel
actions, such as recruitment offers and hiring and promotion policies
and practices) in public places throughout the research institution;
Ø Creating a bonus plan or award system to reward exceptional behavior;
Ø Providing mentorship opportunities for senior and junior faculty and
investigators that emphasize the importance of learning about the
responsible conduct of research;
Ø Publicizing and possibly sanctioning actions that are inconsistent with
the institution’s research mission.
 Promoting Honesty in Research
Education in the responsible conduct of research should be no
less integral to the education of a researcher.

This principle was adopted by the National Academy of Sciences

in 1992 and stated: “Scientists and research institutes should
integrate into their curricula educational programs that foster
faculty and student awareness of concerns related to the integrity
of the research process.”
 Model for education
Ø The educational program should be built around the development of
abilities that give rise to responsible conduct.
Ø The program should be designed in accordance with basic principles of
adult learning
Ø The instruction should be provided as much as possible by faculty who
are actively engaged in research related to that of the trainees.
Ø Interpreting the ethical dimensions of problems in the research setting
Ø eveloping competence in reasoning About the Complex Problems that
arise in the Research Setting:
Ø Moral Motivation and Identity Formation
 Principles of Adult Learning
Ø Education is best provided by individuals who have a deep understanding of
their subject matter and whose teaching reflects that they care about and value
the material being taught;
Ø Educational programs in responsible conduct of research should occur over an
extended period; indeed, they should occur throughout a trainee’s tenure at an
institution;
Ø Active participation in problem-oriented learning is an important component of
effective educational programs;
Ø Programs will be more effective if educators help students assess their prior
knowledge and integrate new material with familiar ideas;
Ø Students should be encouraged to share their own experiences with others in
the class;
Ø Instructional programs that attend to developmental differences and individual
learning preferences are more likely to be effective
THANK YOU
Reference