INTERDISCIPLINARY FIELD RESEARCH METHODOLOGY IN WATER MANAGEMENT Lecture Research Ethics ? ?

What is Ethics?  Most common way of defining "ethics": ethics are norms for conduct that distinguish between or acceptable and unacceptable behavior.  A set of moral principles, values, norms, rules and standards and conduct Is morality nothing more than commonsense??? people recognize some common ethical norms but different individuals interpret, apply, and balance these norms in different ways in light of their own values and life experiences “Morale″ ← Latin “mores″ : custom, habit... indicates the distinction between what is good and what is evil in the everyday life “Ethics″ ← Greek “ethos″ : tradition, habit... the philosophical study of the principles at the basis of morale Both ethics and morale are the result of the society's evolution towards "standard" behaviors.

 Most societies also have legal rules that govern behavior, but ethical norms tend to be broader and more informal than laws.  Although most societies use laws to enforce widely accepted moral standards and ethical and legal rules use similar concepts, it is important to remember that ethics and law are not the same. What is Ethics?

 Research ethics is the study, practice and monitoring of ethical conduct in research Research Ethics Ethics of topics and findings″ effects on society and humanity - where are the limits? Ethics of methods and process credibility of results, trust among scientists and between society and scientists

Importance of Research Ethics?  Promote the aims of research, such as knowledge, truth, and avoidance of error.  Promote the values that are essential to collaborative work, such as trust, accountability, mutual respect, and fairness.  Help to ensure that researchers can be held accountable to the public.  Help to build public support for research.  Promote a variety of other important moral and social values, such as social responsibility, human rights, animal welfare, compliance with the law, and health and safety.

Martinson, Anderson & de Vries, Nature 435, 737 (9 June 2005). Anonymous poll of 3247 scientist funded by NIH. Percentage of scientists who admit having engaged in the behavior listed within the previous 3 years (selection): 0.3Falsifying or „cooking″ research data 1.4Using another’s ideas without permission or giving credit 1.7Unauthorized use of confidential material for own research 6.0Failing to present data that contradict one’s previous research 12.5Overlooking other’s use of flawed data or questionable interpretion 4.7Multiple publication of the same data or results 10.0Inappropriately assigning authorship credit 10.8Withholding details of methodology in papers or proposals 13.5Using inadequate or inappropriate research designs 15.3Dropping observations or data points on a „gut feeling″ 27.5Inadequate record keeping related to research project Why lecture on Research Ethics?

Honesty Strive for honesty in all scientific communications. Honestly report data, results, methods and procedures, and publication status. Do not fabricate, falsify, or misrepresent data. Do not deceive colleagues, granting agencies, or the public. Objectivity Strive to avoid bias in experimental design, data analysis, data interpretation, peer review, personnel decisions, grant writing, expert testimony, and other aspects of research where objectivity is expected or required. Avoid or minimize bias or self-deception. Disclose personal or financial interests that may affect research. Integrity Keep your promises and agreements; act with sincerity; strive for consistency of thought and action. Codes for research ethics

Carefulness Avoid careless errors and negligence; carefully and critically examine your own work and the work of your peers. Keep good records of research activities, such as data collection, research design, and correspondence with agencies or journals. Openness Share data, results, ideas, tools, resources. Be open to criticism and new ideas. Respect for Intellectual Property Honor patents, copyrights, and other forms of intellectual property. Do not use unpublished data, methods, or results without permission. Give credit where credit is due. Give proper acknowledgement or credit for all contributions to research. Never plagiarize. Codes for research ethics

Confidentiality Protect confidential communications, such as papers or grants submitted for publication, personnel records, and patient records. Responsible Publication Publish in order to advance research and scholarship, not to advance just your own career. Avoid wasteful and duplicative publication. Respect for colleagues Respect your colleagues and treat them fairly. Codes for research ethics

Case 1: The casual speaker... On a scientific conference, a well-known scientist gives a review talk. He basically presents his own work. During the discussion, a participant mentions that similar results had been found by two other groups and that a key concept used in his work has been formulated by another researcher. The speaker smiles broadly and answers: „Well, you know, I am not good at giving credit...″ Ethical Decision Making in Research

Case 2: The busy professor tells her group over coffee one afternoon: „Well, you know that I will be terribly busy writing this book over the next two years. So, considering all my other obligations, I will have no time to do regular research. But you know that our funding depends strongly on my research record and publication list. So I suggest that you will put my name on every paper that you write in the coming two years.″ Ethical Decision Making in Research

Case 3: The research protocol for a study of a drug on hypertension requires the administration of the drug at different doses to 50 laboratory mice, with chemical and behavioral tests to determine toxic effects of the drug. Tom has almost finished the experiment for Dr. Q. He has only 5 mice left to do. However, he really wants to finish his work in time to go to Florida on spring break with his friends, who are leaving tonight. He has injected the drug in all 50 mice but has not completed all of the tests. He therefore decides to extrapolate from the 45 completed results to produce the 5 additional results. Ethical Decision Making in Research

 Actions that nearly all researchers classify as unethical are viewed as misconduct.  It is important to remember, however, that misconduct occurs only when researchers intend to deceive: honest errors related to sloppiness, poor record keeping, miscalculations, bias, self-deception, and even negligence do not constitute misconduct.  Also, reasonable disagreements about research methods, procedures, and interpretations do not constitute research misconduct. What is scientific misconduct?

Case 4: Dr. T has just discovered a mathematical error in a paper that has been accepted for publication in a journal. The error does not affect the overall results of his research, but it is potentially misleading. The journal has just gone to press, so it is too late to catch the error before it appears in print. In order to avoid embarrassment, Dr. T decides to ignore the error. Ethical Decision Making in Research

 False statements made knowingly (fabrication/falsification of data through undisclosed selective reporting andrejection of unwanted results or through the manipulation of a representation or illustration)  Infringement of intellectual property (plagiarism, theft of ideas, wrong use of scientific authorship or co-authorship, falsification of the contents, unauthorized publishing or making accessible to third persons of work, findings, hypothesis, theory or research work not yet published)  Impairment of the research work of others (sabotage of research work)  Joint accountability (active participation in the misconduct of others, having knowledge of falsification committed by others, co-authorship of falsified publications) Scientific misconduct(?)

 Publishing the same paper in two different journals without telling the editors  Submitting the same paper to different journals without telling the editors  Including a colleague as an author on a paper in return for a favor even though the colleague did not make a serious contribution to the paper  Discussing with your colleagues data from a paper that you are reviewing for a journal  Trimming outliers from a data set without discussing your reasons in paper  failing to give credit to the work of other scientists Unethical

 Using an inappropriate statistical technique in order to enhance the significance of your research  Bypassing the peer review process and announcing your results through a press conference without giving peers adequate information to review your work  Conducting a review of the literature that fails to acknowledge the contributions of other people in the field or relevant prior work  Stretching the truth on a grant application in order to convince reviewers that your project will make a significant contribution to the field  Stretching the truth on a job application or curriculum vita Unethical

 Giving the same research project to two graduate students in order to see who can do it the fastest  Making derogatory comments and personal attacks in your review of author's submission  Not reporting an adverse event in a human research experiment  Rigging an experiment so you know how it will turn out  Making unauthorized copies of data, papers, or computer programs Unethical

Case 5: Dr. S is a post-doctoral student in computer science working on some programs that eliminate computer viruses. Two other graduate students are working with her on the project, which is directed by a senior researcher. Dr. S has just received an from a research team that is working on a similar project at another university. The other team would like Dr. S to share some preliminary data and designs related to the project. Dr. S has not applied for a patent on this research, although she has discussed possible patents with her supervisor. Ethical Decision Making in Research

Ethics at different stages of research  Research proposal: can you justify your interest and approach?  What might be the impact for people involved in your research?  Access: Are you not exploiting the differences in social position (and the relative weakness of the respondents)?  Data collection: are you asking people things you wouldn’t want to be asked?

Research relationships: Are you manipulating people and relationships in order to get ‘good’ data? Interpretation: are you aware of and reflexive about your biases and assumptions? Reporting: are your informants sufficiently protected? Ethics at different stages of research

Ethical responsibilities of researchers 1.Honor rights to privacy 2.Respect confidentiality 3.Acquire informed consent 4.Do not deceive or harm subject 5.Prevent fraud

1. Rights to privacy Voluntary nature of participation Prior permission Right to withdraw at any time Maintenance of confidentiality Limit time required

2. Confidentiality  Assurance given by the researcher not to reveal the identity of persons who provide research information  Similar to:  Journalists’ assurance not to disclose their source  Physicians, priests, and lawyers are bound to confidentiality in relation to their clients  Anonymity: not reporting information that would reveal the identity of a subject  Information given by an informant assumes a relationship of trust. Respect for that relationship implies confidentiality and/or anonymity

3. Informed consent  Letting perspective subjects know the basic purpose of a study, and then obtaining their permission to be involved  It does not mean that subjects must be told everything they will experience in a study, but that they are given sufficient info about the study to decide about participation

4. Deceiving or causing harm  Deceiving: misinformation intentionally given to subject about study  Physical or emotional harm that subjects experience as a result of taking part  Example: experiment with electric shocks

5. Scientific fraud/misconduct(?) 1.Plagiarism: Copying passages from an article or book without crediting the original author 2.Intentional misrepresentation of research findings

Acquiring access and approval A proper introduction of research(er) Assure confidentiality Guarantee anonymity Limit the time you spend with a subject Do not pressure him/her Promise a summary of results

Case 6: During your field visit, you find out (from interviews with a few persons) something interesting in relation to water management in Bakkhali. Ethical Decision Making in Research 2. You come to know that a good number of people, reportedly affiliated with the UP Chairman’s Office, are involved in fishing activities (culture activities) in areas upstream of the inflated dam. You are told that the project beneficiaries do not get any benefits from this. One person remarks that the UP Chairman is on very good terms with the Secretary of the WMCA. 1. In one block, you come to know that water supplied by the scheme manager is distributed unevenly; some of the farmers have plenty of water in their fields and some have no water. One person casually remarks that gifts (fish and vegetables) are sent to the scheme manager’s house from the farmers who received water.

Case 6: 1.What do you think of this behavior? 2.Will you report this significant finding in your final report on water management in Bakkhali? 3.How will you report on it? 4.What might be the impact for the people involved in your research? 5.How has research ethics informed your decision? 6.Do you let your subject know what you think? 7.Will you inform the authorities about this illegal act? Ethical Decision Making in Research

March 21: Getting to know the area 8:30 am – 10:00 amBriefing and Meeting at LGED officials at LGED 10:30 am-1:30 pm: Field orientation, interviews 1:30 – 2:00 pm:Lunch 2:00 – 3:30 pm: Field orientation, interviews 4:00 – 7:00 pm:Break 7:00 – 8:00 pm:Fine tuning and finalization of research proposal Day report submission March 22: Field Research 8:30 – 9:30 am:Presentation of proposal and discussion 9:30 am – 1:30 pmField investigation 1:30 – 2:00 pm:Lunch 2:00 – 3:30 pm: Field investigation 4:00 – 7:00 pm:Break 7:00 – 8:00 pm:Day report submission, oral exam March 23: Field Research 8:30 am – 1:30 pm:Field investigation 1:30 – 2:00 pm:Lunch 2:00 – 3:30 pm: Field investigation 4:00 – 7:00 pm:Break 7:00 – 8:00 pm:Day report submission, oral exam Field Practical (off to Bakkhali!!!)

March 24: Field Research 8:30 am – 1:30 pm:Field investigation 1:30 – 2:00 pm:Lunch 2:00 – 3:30 pm: Field investigation 4:00 – 7:00 pm:Break 7:00 – 8:00 pm:Day report submission, oral exam March 25: Field Research 8:30 am – 1:30 pm:Field investigation 1:30 – 2:00 pm:Lunch 2:00 – 3:30 pm: Field investigation 4:00 – 7:00 pm:Break 7:00 – 8:00 pm:Day report submission, oral exam Field Practical

March 27:Compilation of data for report preparation March 28:Compilation of data for report preparation March 29: Meet at IWFM at 10:00 am Submission of draft research report (6 copies) Distribution of reports for peer review March 30:Meet at IWFM at 3:00 pm Submission of peer review report Presentation of research report and feedback April 01:Submission of Final Research Report by 11:00 am Back to Dhaka !!!!!!!!!!!!

 Not a journal or diary  What you did in connection with your research objectives/questions and what results you got  Some synthesis/verification in line with your research questions  Information that might be useful to the other groups Writing Day Reports

Do’s House Rules Don’ts