NEED TO MAKE THIS PRESENTATION process & intellectual property/plagiarism/authorship

“Integrity is doing the right thing, even if nobody is watching.” ~ unknown author

 1. the philosophical study of the moral value of human conduct and of the rules and principles that ought to govern it; moral philosophy  2. a social, religious, or civil code of behavior considered correct, esp. that of a particular group, profession, or individual  3. the moral fitness of a decision, course of action, etc.

 No real guidelines prior to late 1940s  Early medical & psychological researchers assumed fellow researchers would not allow harm to come to their participants/students/clients  Several notable historical examples prove this to have been…wrong… ◦ The Tuskegee Study –  Now - written ethical standards regarding research, teaching, therapy, supervision, etc.

 Specificity of terms ◦ The APA ethical code was first published in 1958, revised in 1972, 1992, 2002, 2010 ◦ Guide for researchers, teachers, therapists, administrators ◦ Ethical dilemmas are common because the code is pretty vague  Have to be a psychologist for the code to apply? ◦ Technically, yes…but…  Are they guidelines, or rules? ◦ Both! ◦ We are expected to act ethically & encourage others to do so too, but… ◦ 1974 National Research Act requires all research institutions to have Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to ensure protection of human participants ◦ 1985 – U.S. Dept. of Agriculture published guidelines for treatment of animal subjects ◦ Codes of conduct

 Office of Responsible Research Practices ◦ Institutional Animal Care & Use Committee (IACUC) ◦ Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC) ◦ Institutional Review Board (IRB)  Check whether ethical principles are being followed  Evaluate Risk/Benefit ratio for the study ◦ Subjective evaluation of costs & rewards to the participants & society  Asks the question: Is this research worth it? ◦ Consider whether it is a well-designed study ◦ Is there a way to do the study using lower risk procedures?

 A man has been on an inpatient unit for years – he has schizophrenia & borderline (low) IQ – his functioning is low enough that he cannot sign his name – a new anti-psychotic medication becomes available for clinical trial & the unit psychiatrists switch him to it with the patient’s consent – he has had satisfactory response to his current regimen of medication – his family is not informed of the switch – a few weeks later, he suffers a heart attack and dies, perhaps as a result of the switch – after his death, the family argues that they should have been consulted - did the physicians on the unit behave ethically?

 Including physical & psychological/emotional  During experiment & in future as a result of their participation  Always strive for minimal risk ◦ No risks greater than they would experience in daily life ◦ Historical example = Milgram’s Obedience Study  Pretty much all the other rules stem from this Prime Directive

 Privacy – the right to decide how information about themselves is communicated to others  Confidentiality – what happens in the research study (therapy session, grades, supervision, etc.) stays in there

 Physical, psychological, monetary  Use of convenience samples ◦ Intro Psych students ◦ Prisoners ◦ Inpatients  Compensation?

 Social contract between researcher & participant  The researcher must tell them about anything that might influence their willingness to participate ◦ Activities to expect ◦ Risks/benefits ◦ Right to withdraw  The participant’s ethical obligation is to behave appropriately – no lying, cheating, etc.  Who can’t give consent?

 Research examples - What Do You Think?  Withholding information or misinforming participants  Pros ◦ Can study natural behavior ◦ Can get at behaviors/beliefs not readily studied without deception  Cons ◦ Contradicts informed consent ◦ May make people suspicious

 In studies with deception ◦ Reasons for deception ◦ Clear misconceptions ◦ Remove harmful effects  In all studies ◦ Benefits researchers & participants  Educational  Participants’ viewpoint  Helpful to interpretation of results

 Who gets publication credit? ◦ Who made significant contribution?  What does significant contribution mean? ◦ Credit vs. authorship ◦ Discuss this openly, early, & often  Plagiarism issues ◦ The standard: don’t present substantial portions or elements of another’s work as your own  What does “substantial” mean? ◦ When do you cite? ◦ When do you use quote marks? ◦ Do you cite if you use quote marks? ◦ Can you turn in virtually the same paper in 2 different classes? ◦ Plagiarism.org

Me: The Office of Responsible Research Practices: OSU Code of Student Conduct (& other helpful links):