Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T03:24:05.050Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Empowering Graduate Students to Address Ethics in Research Environments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 July 2019

ELISABETH HILDT ,
KELLY LAAS ,
CHRISTINE MILLER ,
STEPHANIE TAYLOR  and
ERIC M. BREY
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

In this article, we present an educational intervention that embeds ethics education within research laboratories. This structure is designed to assist students in addressing ethical challenges in a more informed way, and to improve the overall ethical culture of research environments. The project seeks (a) to identify factors that students and researchers consider relevant to ethical conduct in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) and (b) to promote the cultivation of an ethical culture in experimental laboratories by integrating research stakeholders in a bottom-up approach to developing context-specific, ethics-based guidelines. An important assumption behind this approach is that direct involvement in the process of developing laboratory specific ethical guidelines will positively influence researchers’ understanding of ethical research and practice issues, their handling of these issues, and the promotion of an ethical culture in the respective laboratory. The active involvement may increase the sense of ownership and integration of further discussion on these important topics. Based on the project experiences, the project team seeks to develop a module involving the bottom-up building of codes-of-ethics-based guidelines that can be used by a broad range of institutions and that will be distributed widely.

Keywords

ethicsresearch ethicsresponsible conduct of researchRCRethics educationgraduate students
Type
Departments and Columns
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 28 , Issue 3 , July 2019 , pp. 542 - 550
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The aim of this section is to expand and accelerate advances in methods of teaching bioethics.

This project is funded by the National Science Foundation, Award Number #1635661.

References

Notes

1. Award Abstract #1635661: Standard proposal: Building a culture of responsible research and practice in STEM; https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=1635661&HistoricalAwards=false (last accessed 22 Oct 2018).

2. National Science Foundation. Cultivating cultures for ethical STEM (CCE STEM). Program Solicitation NSF 15–528, 2015.

3. Holsapple, MA, Carpenter, DD, Sutkus, JA, Finelli, CJ, Harding, TS. Framing faculty and student discrepancies in engineering ethics education delivery. Journal of Engineering Education 2012;101(2):169–86;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Kalichman, M. Rescuing responsible conduct of research (RCR) education. Accountability in Research 2014;21(1):68–83;CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed Plemmons, DK, Kalichman, MW. Reported goals of instructors of responsible conduct of research for teaching of skills. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics 2013;8(2):95–103;CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed Kalichman MW, Plemmons D. Research Ethics Workshop: Promoting Ethics in Research. Richmond [cited 12 Sept 2018]; available at http://www.onlineethics.org/File.aspx?id=34264&v=3b1a9266 (last accessed 22 Oct 2018).

4. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Fostering Integrity in Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/21896.

5. Watts, LL, Medeiros, KE, Mulhearn, TJ, Steele, LM, Connelly, S, Mumford, MD. Are ethics training programs improving? A meta-analytic review of past and present ethics instruction in the sciences. Ethics & Behavior 2017;27(5):351–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

6. See note 3, Holsapple et al. 2012.

7. Wenger, E. Communities of practice and social learning systems: The career of a concept. In: Blackmore, C, ed., Social Learning Systems and Communities of Practice. London: Springer London; 2010:179–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8. National Institutes of Health. Update on the Requirement for Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research: National Institutes of Health [cited 12 Sept 2018]; available at https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-10-019.html (last accessed 22 Oct 2018).

9. Mumford, MD, Murphy, ST, Connelly, S, Hill, JH, Antes, AL, Brown, RP, Devenport, LD. Environmental influences on ethical decision making: Climate and environmental predictors of research integrity. Ethics & Behavior 2007;17(4):337–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10. Kalichman, MW, Plemmons, DK. Research agenda: The effects of responsible-conduct-of-research training on attitudes. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics 2015;10(5):457–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

11. Davis, M. Thinking like an engineer: The place of a code of ethics in the practice of a profession. Philosophy & Public Affairs 1991;20(2):150–67.Google Scholar

12. American Physical Society. 02.2 APS Guidelines for Professional Conduct. American Physical Society, 2004; available at http://www.aps.org/policy/statements/02_2.cfm (last accessed 22 Oct 2018).