Responsible Science Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process: Volume II (1993) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
8 Guidelines for Investigators in Scientific Research
8 Guidelines for Investigators in Scientific Research
Pages 138-158
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 138... ...
The second feature of this document that is worthy of note is its intention to promote the highest scientific and ethical standards. Although it is undeniable that the recent national focus of attention on misconduct in research influenced the decision to form this committee, the committee was not charged with the negative goal of preventing or prosecuting unacceptable behavior in the biomedical sciences.
|
From page 139... ...
Authorship defines our output as scholars; Bus this important subject, as well as the related area of peer review, is covered in considerable detail. A consideration of the rules of proper conduct in the general discussion of the academic environment, the responsibilities of the institution to its faculty members, and guidelines for academic advancement are presented.
|
From page 140... ...
b. Assist postdoctoral trainees in defining independent areas of research to pursue.
|
From page 141... ...
. Before the research efforts of the trainee commence, the mentor must take special care to educate him in all matters related to laboratory safety, humane treatment of animals, and safe conduct of human research.
|
From page 142... ...
c. Make certain that all staff are aware of any calibration or routine maintenance procedures associated with experimental instrumentation.
|
From page 143... ...
It should be recognized that all scientific efforts, in the final analysis, are judged by the interpretation and results expressed in published or presented documents. Careful attention to both the organization and the details of data collection, analysis, and storage will assist in the maintenance of the highest quality and quantity of research to be disseminated.
|
From page 144... ...
A protocol of the experimental design should be available for all personnel involved and become part of the scientific notebook. Many issues may arise, however, during the conduct of an experiment requiring revision of the protocol or an evolution of the experimental design.
|
From page 145... ...
If the reviewer feels that he is not sufficiently knowledgeable to review the subject in an expert fashion, he should not accept the manuscript or grant application for review. In many instances he will know the applicant; it is, therefore, an obvious right and an obligation that he remain anonymous before and after publication.
|
From page 146... ...
Conflicts of interest under these circumstances might include situations in which the reviewer is a direct competitor or a mentor of the party submitting work for review or, alternatively, if the reviewer may derive a direct personal benefit from the review. If, on the other hand, the reviewer is convinced that he can provide an unbiased opinion of the submitted material and the overseer of the review (e.g., editor or study section)
|
From page 147... ...
Services, consulting, or materials provided for a fee, or reimbursement; d. Involvement in patient care or providing patient samples; e.
|
From page 148... ...
_ In order to avoid conflicts or misunderstanding, me publication policy of each laboratory should be discussed openly, and, whenever possible, the principal author should apprise all contributors to a project of the manner in which their input will be recognized before commencing with their efforts. Individuals should be included as authors on a work submitted for publication if they have provided significant contributions affecting its direction, scope, or depth.
|
From page 149... ...
This principle should also extend to the provision of routine technical work, as may be provided by any paid technician in a laboratory, without significant input into the design or conduct of a study. In clinical areas, contributions limited to involvement in the care of a patient or to the provision of specimens from a patient should not be grounds for inclusion as an author on a manuscript.
|
From page 150... ...
Despite the academic pressure, real or imagined, to demonstrate excellence with quantity rather than quality of publications, every effort should be made to avoid fragmentation of a complete body of work into separate publications. Moreover, the practice of publishing the same materials in more than one manuscript is inappropriate except in clearly identified review articles with citations of the original work.
|
From page 151... ...
Each grant funding agency has its own guidelines for the filing and granting of patents. It is necessary to be aware of these guidelines and to adhere to them should a patentable device or process result from research funded by a specific _ .
|
From page 152... ...
Individual entrepreneurial activities should not interfere with the University's academic mission. An excessive focus on personal financial gain within an academic setting could hamper the collegiality that is fundamental to investigative interchange.
|
From page 153... ...
b. The evaluation process should consider the candidate's research productivity, teaching excellence, administrative or other responsibilities, and evidence of peer recognition.
|
From page 154... ...
Attention should be focused on results that have been subjected to intensive editorial review and placed in full view of a critical scientific community. The responsibility for maintaining the highest ethical standards in science rests within individual institutions and with all persons engaged in research: professionals, trainees, and support personnel.
|
From page 155... ...
Thus, it is the duty of chairmen and/or section heads to formulate for members of the faculty clear job descriptions, which explicitly focus on the proportional mix of various activities including teaching, administration, service, and research. These expectations, while reflecting institutional standards of excellence, must in tolo be attainable.
|
From page 156... ...
As individuals are evaluated, those responsible for the process must focus on qualitative as well as quantitative criteria. Emphasis in the evaluation process must be on excellence of teaching and its significance to the educational enterprise of the Department and School, on the quality of patient care rather than on the volume of revenue, and on the quality and impact of scholarly research rather than on the number of publications or grant dollars generated.
|
From page 157... ...
Candidates for associate professor will have peer recognition for their scholarship. Such recognition might include independent grant funding, membership in scholarly societies, or editorial work for scholarly journals.
|
From page 158... ...
They must have achieved national or international recognition for their scholarly activities. Candidates must have developed a focused program of scholarly investigation.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.