1. 9/4/20151 Ethics and the Responsible Conduct of Research for Graduate Education and Beyond Kellina Craig-Henderson, Ph.D. Program Director and Human Subjects Research Protections Officer National Science Foundation

2. 9/4/20152 2 Responsible conduct in the research enterprise is a shared responsibility.

3. 9/4/20153 The Belmont Report 45 CFR 690 (same as 45 CFR 46- HHS) The Common Rule for the protection of human subjects ( www.bfa/dias/policy/docs/45cfr690.pdf) Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research

4. 9/4/20154 Respect for PersonsRespect for Persons BeneficenceBeneficence JusticeJustice

5. 9/4/20155 Respect for persons This principle has 2 separate moral requirements: 1. Respect individuals’ autonomy. 2. In the case of diminished autonomy,consult their legally authorized representative.

6. 9/4/20156 Beneficence Two general rules apply here : 1. Do not harm! 2. Maximize possible benefits, and minimize possible harms.

7. 9/4/20157 Justice  To each person an equal share.  To each person according to individual need.  To each person according to individual effort.  To each person according to societal contribution.  To each person according to merit. “Who should receive the benefits of research and bear its burdens ?”

8. 9/4/20158 Responsibility 9/4/20158 The Sponsor The Grantee The Researcher

9. National Science Foundation One sponsor’s responsibility includes: RCR requirement 9/4/20159

10. Legislative history: Introduced - May 10, 2007 Passed House - May 22, 2007 Passed Senate – July 19, 2007 Differences resolved – Aug 2, 2007 Signed by President – Aug 9, 2007 America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education and Science Act: The America COMPETES Act 9/4/201510

11. America COMPETES Act – SEC. 7009 “The Director shall require that each institution that applies for financial assistance from the Foundation for science and engineering research or education describe in its grant proposal a plan to provide appropriate training and oversight in the responsible and ethical conduct of research to undergraduate students, graduate students, and postdoctoral researchers participating in the proposed research project.” 11

12. 9/4/201512 Responsibility 9/4/201512 The Sponsor The Grantee The Researcher

13. 9/4/201513 Ethics in Research Grantee’s responsibility… Context-driven Environment- dependent

14. Empirical study Martinson et al., 2006 provides support for the effect of the contexts of science on misconduct: Perceptions of procedural injustice are associated with self reports of misbehaviors. This relationship is strongest among early- career scientists, those in un-tenurable positions, female scientists in traditionally- male fields. 9/4/201514

15. 9/4/201515 Responsibility 9/4/201515 The Sponsor The Grantee The Researcher

16. Scientists behaving badly 9/4/201516

17. Top 10 Misbehaviors Falsifying or “cooking” research data Ignoring major aspects of human subjects requirements Not properly disclosing involvement in forms whose products are based on one’s own research Relationships with students, research subjects or clients that may be interpreted as questionable Using another’s ideas without obtaining permission or giving due credit 9/4/201517

18. Top 10 misbehaviors cont’d: Unauthorized use of confidential information in connection with one’s own research. Failing to present data that contradict one’s own previous research. Circumventing certain minor aspects of HS requirements (e.g., informed consent). Overlooking others use of flawed data or questionable interpretation of data. Changing the design, methodology or results of a study in response to pressure from a funding source. 18

19. 9/4/201519 Empirical study De Vries et al., 2006 provides evidence of everyday misbehaviors among researchers. They conclude that many of these misbehaviors are “normal misbehaviors.” Must direct attention to the social conditions, and context that lead to these unacceptable misbehaviors. 9/4/2015

20. Research misconduct is not rare What is considered misconduct varies by The Sponsor The Grantee The Researcher 9/4/201520

21. When you observe potential misconduct, what should you do? It depends…. 9/4/201521

22. 1. Constructive confrontation 2. Conflict management 3. Grievance processes 4. Whistle-blowing 9/4/201522

23. Reducing misconduct in research starts with TRAINING!!! 9/4/201523

24. Case study 1 A graduate student is conducting a study to find out how bilingual English-Spanish speaking students navigate bi- cultural, bilingual identity in a rural high school setting. The study will take place in small town in Eastern Washington State that has one high school with approximately 400 students. The research methods include: weekly interviews, and in-depth classroom observation of four Spanish-English bilingual 14 – 17 year old students over one academic year. The researcher will also conduct interviews with administration, teachers, parents, and other students about their thoughts on language and local identity. What are some of ethical issues inherent in the design of this study? What are some of the ethical issues that might unfold during the conduct of the study? 24

25. Case 2: Who Owns the Field Notes? Jerry Vaughn contracted with a federal agency to conduct a social impact assessment of proposed topographic changes in an aboriginal habitat in a far north region of North America. The contract contained no stipulations regarding ownership of data. In order to determine the potential impacts on the culture of peoples living in that region, Vaughn engaged in participant observation (keeping a detailed field notebook of same); conducted in-depth personal interviews; and took over 1,000 photographs of people working, socializing, and enjoying other everyday and special activities. 9/4/201525

26. Case 3: Professor Purloins Student's Work: Her Recourse? Joelle Smith wrote an elaborate research proposal that was to be submitted to the National Science Foundation (NSF) for her doctoral dissertation research. Her dissertation supervisor signed off on the proposal indicating his support of the project and his willingness to supervise Smith's work. The project was funded for a two-year period. Smith went into the field and at regular intervals sent copies of her field notes and other written data, along with preliminary analyses of her field problem, to her dissertation advisor. 9/4/201526

27. 9/4/201527 For more information, if you are a researcher please feel free to contact your Institutional Official (IO), or if you are an IO or member of the Sponsored Research Office, please contact your Funding Agency (i.e., program officer or human subjects protections officer), or the Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) of HHS.

28. 9/4/201528 Contact Information : Kellina M. Craig-Henderson, PhD (703) 292-7023 Khenders@nsf.gov Social Psychology program National Sceince Foundation 4201 Wilson Blvd., 995.45 Arlington, VA 22230