Training the Trainers Workshop Ramona Mellott, PI John Masserini, Co-Presenter

Transcription

1 MODELING EFFECTIVE RESEARCH ETHICS EDUCATION IN INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATIONS Training the Trainers Workshop Ramona Mellott, PI John Masserini, Co-Presenter

2 PURPOSE OF THE WORKSHOP Received an award in 2012 from the Council of Graduate Schools and the National Science Foundation Only 5 universities were funded across the country to address this topic Reason for funding: NAU s commitment to global education Increase in international research and collaborations Globalization trends in commerce, industry, and travel Important to educate graduate student researchers in research ethics as they prepare to work in international settings

3 GRANT ACTIVITIES TO DATE Hosted expert speakers to discuss key issues related to research integrity and international collaborations (April 2013) Held Strategic Planning Sessions with international researchers and interested graduate students in conjunction with presentations in April 2013 to develop student learning outcomes Developed student learning outcomes (see attachment) Developed project website, which includes research integrity resources Developed online modules, which include an overview modules and four subject area modules (health sciences, social sciences, biological sciences, and natural sciences (forestry)) Training the Trainers workshop (September 2014) Other (ongoing-not directly related to grant) NAU has a Research Integrity Policy (see attachment) NAU also has a Misconduct in Research Policy which delineates steps taken in case of a research misconduct Worked with key stakeholder faculty group from across the university who provided input on the RCR Training Plan Working with the Office of the Vice President for Research (John McGregor) to finalize Draft Research Integrity Training Plan (see attachment)

4 LEARNING OUTCOMES To gain an understanding of the topic of research integrity in the context of international collaborations To experience the value of in-person discussions of complex research ethics misconduct cases To become familiar with the online learning modules available to faculty at NAU for use in their research mentorship of graduate students or in their research-related classes

5 ROLE OF THE INSTITUTION Institution is responsible for Creating a culture of integrity Establishing core values regardless of what is studied or the disciplines involved Setting the foundation and upholding the values of academic and research integrity Complying with regulations (NIH and NSF) Addressing training issues of research integrity and international collaborations

6 RECENT LEGISLATION (OR NOT SO RECENT) National Science Foundation (NSF) All applicants for NSF funding at the time of proposal submission must describe in the proposal a valid RCR training plan at their institution, and within a certain time frame (60 days) of submitting their funding applications show that they have successfully completed RCR instruction (Jan 4, 2010) The ideal RCR instruction plan may/must also include face-toface (in addition to online training) interactions between students and faculty or RCR trainers, where topics of RCR are adequately discussed National Institute for Health (NIH) All those receiving NIH funding (new or renewal) must receive RCR instruction (January 25, 2010) RCR instruction plans must be included in new institutional applications for funding, as with renewal applications, along with any changes of RCR instruction plans As far as format of the training, RCR plans with only online instruction are not acceptable.

7 WHAT IS RESEARCH? Research includes all basic, applied, and demonstration research in all fields of science, engineering and mathematics. This includes, but is not limited to, research in economics, education, linguistics, medicine, psychology, social sciences, statistics, and research involving human subjects and animals. (Office of Science and Technology Policy: Executive Federal Policy on Research Misconduct) At NAU the term research applies to all research, scholarship, and creative activities

8 WHAT IS MISCONDUCT IN RESEARCH? The Fabrication, Falsification, or Plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research or in reporting research results Does not include: Honest error or differences of opinion

9 WHAT IS MISCONDUCT IN RESEARCH? Definition Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them 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

10 SHOCKING HEADLINES! Journals Find Fakery in Many Images Submitted to Support Research Stem Cell Trickery - A postdoctoral research fellow at Emory University falsifies stem cell research data Trickery/ Harvard investigation of stem cell scientific misconduct provides insight into secretive process The Mind of a Con Man

11 WHY DOES MISCONDUCT IN RESEARCH HAPPEN? Breakout session Groups of 3-4 people Groups record at least 5 reasons for each question: 1. Is misconduct in research blown way out of proportion? 2. What factors contribute to misconduct in research or scholarship or creative activities? 3. Share a possible research misconduct situation you encountered when you were a student that made you uncomfortable. What do you wish you would have known as a student to help you in that situation?

12 WHY THE INCREASED FOCUS ON THIS TOPIC IN GENERAL AND IN INTERNATIONAL SETTINGS? Increasing cases of misconduct Decreasing public trust in researchers and their research Increasing open access publication Negative impact on society Global impact Building a culture of responsible research Promoting reliable research Protecting the public Protecting the reputation of researchers and research Increasing in international collaborations Leveraging scarce resources effectively

13 FOUR MAJOR TOPICS Collaborative Research Includes any research that involves the combined efforts of multiple researchers or contributors facilitating the completion of a research project either domestically or in an international collaborative context. This form of research is independent of the funding from or intellectual efforts of any single individual. Conflicts of Interest Are competing obligations and interests that can lead to competing responsibilities and bias. Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship Is the credit given to those who conducted research and made the research available for public consumption through a published work. Data Management Includes properly acquiring and maintaining research data.

14 COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH Researchers must Develop the skills and awareness to navigate research situations where expectations about data sharing, authorship, and research guidelines and ethics may differ across countries and cultural contexts Utilize effective oral and written communications to avoid and resolve potential conflicts Case Study Dr. Johnson, an associate professor of psychology at Northern Arizona University, has published an article in which he proposed that perceived mattering to same-sex friends explains the relationship between friendship quality and happiness. She supported her model in an American sample and will test the generalizability of her model in a cross-cultural study. Specifically, she will test her model in Malaysia and Ghana. She learns through exchanges with her colleagues and collaborators that there is no IRB-equivalent institutions in these nations and informed consents are not deemed as necessary. What should Dr. Johnson do and how could she proceed with her study? Exercise What should you do when working in a host country that does not have an ethical code? (Refer to the guidelines in Leach and Oakland, 2010).

15 CONFLICT OF INTEREST Case Study Two researchers, Dr. Fuka and Dr. Wise, are collaborating on a project to mitigate the bark beetle s destruction of trees in a forest in Australia. Dr. Fuka works in the United States, while Dr. Wise works from a university in Australia. The results of their study suggest that none of the tested mitigation factors would deter the beetles from continually destroying the trees, so they recommended to the Australian government to cut all of the beetle-infested trees, as well as those in a buffer zone around the infested trees to deter future destruction. After completing their research and publishing an article, Dr. Fuka discovers that Dr. Wise and two of her graduate students accepted research funding from a prominent logging company in Australia and an oil company in Saudi Arabia. Both of these companies are working together to clear the forest and start drilling for oil. Dr. Fuka is concerned that this funding may have influenced the analysis of the results were analyzed. After a re-analysis of the results, Dr. Fuka finds that 2 of the 5 mitigation factors tested would actually deter beetles from destroying the trees. Exercise What should Dr. Fuka do now? Who should she contact and in what order? How could she have decreased the possible conflicts of interest from the very beginning of the research project?

16 PUBLICATION PRACTICES AND RESPONSIBLE AUTHORSHIP Importance of Responsible Authorship Giving credit to where it is due Discussing authorship credit Authorship credit on publications International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) indicates that authorship credit be based on: (citiprogram.org) Idea conception, design of the study, or acquisition of data, or analysis or interpretation Writing or critically reviewing manuscript Approving the final version for publication Plagiarism Definition: Presentation of someone else s words or idea as one s own is plagiarism (citiprograms.org). Most common offense in scholarly publications Sometimes unintentional Notes taken mistaken as one s own ideas

17 DATA MANAGEMENT What not to do! Data Sharing and Management Snafu in 3 Short Acts (4:41) Check out this short and humorous video describing a data management and sharing nightmare. See if you can determine all of the data management errors made by the brown bear Questions on the data ownership case study: Who owns Student A s data? What can Professor X and Student A do that potentially benefits them both while also following responsible conduct of science regulations? Questions for discussion about the NSF and Genome Researchers Data Sharing Guidelines: Do the two sets of guidelines have different emphases? Is it easy to know if you are following the guidelines or not? Questions about Dryad and GenBank data bases: Do the databases seem easy to use if you are contributing data? Do the databases seem easy to use if you are accessing data? Both GenBank and Dryad are international data bases which should provide ways of data archiving and sharing for biologists around the world. Do you see any problems with the way that the database websites are structured that might limit participation by some nations? What data management mistakes did the brown bear make?

18 INSTRUCTIONAL OPPORTUNITIES/ADDITIONAL RESOURCES/NEXT STEPS Complete CITI Responsible Conduct of Research Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative-CITI Complete an in-person Research Integrity workshop offered at NAU Students receive information through your NAU address Notices posted on Facebook Complete Research Integrity and International Collaborations online modules/in-person training Contact Kirsten Slaughter-Rice to receive access to online modules Check these websites for research integrity resources: