172824433 Collaborative Research

8/12/2019 172824433 Collaborative Research

1/6

Juan Colon Hernandez (Member ID: 3173775)

CITICollaborative Institutional Training InitiativeResources Main Menu| Select Language| Logoff

Contents|Acknowledgments| Resources|Glossary| Readability

Collaborative Research (RCR-Humanities)

"The publication of a scholarly article is an often lengthy process that requires close interaction among all

participants. A common understanding of the typical steps in that process and of concerns that may arise along the

way should facilitate communication and cooperation." - Modern Language Association [1]

Introductory Video Case

Please review this 3 minute video case

study before you begin reading the

foundation text. It is extremely likely that

the video will permit you to identify with the

issues and provide some personal

relevance to the topic.

The Case

George, Justin, Kristin, Esom,

and Sean are collaborating on

an NIH-funded project. Four of

the five investigators are havinga conference call to discuss the

progress on the grant. They are

up against a deadline to submit

the progress report to the NIH.

Sean has written a draft but the

collaborators seem ill-prepared

for the meeting and are having

difficulty agreeing on who

should be doing what with

respect to the collaboration.

Communication between the

investigators is breaking down.

Watch the video to see how thedynamic plays out. The

collaboration seems to be in

trouble. What has gone wrong?

What should they do now? How

are they going to get the

progress report done in time?

What would you do in this

type of situation?

This streaming video is best viewed

with MS Media Player.

Download QuickTime Video Player

or Real Playerfor this video.

Introduction

f 6 12/5/12 11


2/6

A researcher individually struggling to answer an important research question tends to be the exception rather than

the norm these days. Researchers in many fields prefer to work with others in and out of their areas, in order to

obtain complementary expertise, save time, or decrease expenses. Other researchers seek collaborations as a way

of finding innovative approaches to solving problems. Multiple factors contribute to this increase in research

collaborations. Technology, such as e-mail, allows for communication across countries and nations. Further, private

and federal funding sources encourage collaborative and multidisciplinary projects. Although collaborative and

multidisciplinary research is flourishing, problems can arise.

Learning Objectives

After reviewing this module, you should be able to:

Recognize the increased tendency toward collaborative research in many fields.

Identify the pitfalls that may occur in collaborative research.

Gain familiarity with ways to enhance good collaborative research.

Describe the institutional processes involved in collaborative research.

Examine some of the ethical considerations in collaborative research.

Appreciate the resources available to deal with collaborative research.

The Trend Toward More Collaborative Research

Increasingly, researchers are collaborating in small and large groups, and in many cases will work with scholars

who are educated and skilled in different subjects. As the trend towards more interdisciplinary research continues,

scholars must be willing to embrace new ways of thinking. In some fields, especially in the humanities, the single-author monograph has long been the standard means of sharing research and scholarship. Recently, however,

humanities graduate programs, professional societies, and journals have begun to officially recognize collaborative

work as a new standard for scholarship, promotion, and publication. Researchers and scholars are going to be

required to seek out collaborators and learn to work with others outside the realm of their own expertise.

Collaboration and multidisciplinary scholarship can open up new avenues of research, and permit the exploration of

existing topics with unprecedented depth and dimensionality. However, any collaboration, whether in a field where

joint effort is well established, or as part of a new investigative approach, takes special skills, time, and can create

conflict.

What is Collaborative Research?

What is a collaboration?

Traditionally, collaboration refers to scholars who work within the same discipline, either within an institution or in

different institutions. When a cultural anthropologist studying the family structures of a remote tribe works with a

biological anthropologist to obtain DNA evidence concerning the relatedness of individuals, that is a collaboration

within anthropology.

Multidisciplinary research is a form of collaborative research that involves researchers or scholars working across

disciplines, either within an institution or in different institutions. A physician working with an engineer to

manufacture a new imaging device, an epidemiologist working with a political scientist on a tobacco-control

initiative, or an archaeologist consulting with a historian and a linguist, are all examples of multidisciplinary research

projects. When the pharmaceutical industry works with a medical center to perform a clinical trial of a new drug, it is

a collaboration across industry and academia. Each of these interactions creates different expectations and

requires a variety of modes of communication to ensure that the collaboration is successful.

What is spurring the increasingly collaborative nature of research?

Funding sources

The federal government, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the

National Science Foundation (NSF), supports projects that ask for researchers in

different disciplines to work together. The NIH has defined certain areas for study, such

as nano-medicine and structural biology, which will involve research within and across

disciplines, and, in some cases, with industry.

NSF supports "cross-cutting/interdisciplinary programs" that seek new, multidisciplinary

approaches in research, education, earth systems, and organizational structures. Private

foundations also will fund centers at universities that bring together expertise in different areas to solve a

particular problem. Further, many universities have set up funding streams to support innovative

f 6 12/5/12 11


3/6

research approaches.

Ease with new telecommunications technologies

E-mail and internet-based technologies have changed the way people across the globe interact, and

scholars are among the beneficiaries of the new communications technology. Where in the past

researchers may have taken a leave of absence to visit another country to review ancient manuscripts,

they can now collaborate with resident scholars with ease. Questions that might not have been possible

to pursue can now be asked, and research can move at a much faster pace. Consultation with experts in

different fields and at different institutions, and sharing of resources, can occur almost instantaneously.

Technology transfer between academia and industry

The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 allowed universities to have control of the intellectual property that is

generated from federally funded research. Many universities have benefited from the licensing revenue

of intellectual property patented by recipients of federal grant funds. Recent inventions, in the form of

new drugs and computer technologies, have also helped the public. The law has encouraged new

relationships between academic researchers and companies. In 2004, Congress went a bit further and

enacted the CREATE Act to foster intellectual-property protection for researchers collaborating across

institutions.

Critics suggest that the Bayh-Dole act has caused universities to become too entangled with industry

rather than relying on raising money from tuition and other sources. Additional problems, such as

researchers having a conflict of interest since their research might benefit them financially, have also

been attributed to the increased ease with which academic-industry relationships can form.

What are Some of the Potential Problems with Collaborative Research?

Difference in style of researchers

People relate to one another in different ways. Some people are more formal, while others are more laid-back and

relaxed. Some scholars develop a collaborative project idea during a handshake at a conference, and the tenor of

the relationship remains informal throughout. Others require more documentation and rigorous enumeration of

responsibilities. Even if a researcher works easily with another researcher, shared grants, data, and materials

require more formal written agreements involving grants-and-contracts offices at their respective universities. As

scholars in the humanities develop a culture of collaborative and multidisciplinary work, these challenges will need

to be addressed.

Difference in style of research across and within disciplines

One collaborator believes that peer-reviewed papers should be short and should

use a limited amount of data. Another collaborator suggests that more work

should be done and the "story" of the research should be further developed

before anything gets published. This kind of disagreement can occur with

collaborators in the same field or in different fields. Standards of authorship vary

among disciplines, and may not be well established in some research areas. In

many fields, people who have not contributed substantially to the intellectual

process of the research are not included, while, in other fields, people get authorship if they participated

in doing the research at any level. Determining the order of names appearing on a multi-author paper

can be quite complicated and become a source of conflict.

Ethical considerations may affect research across institutions and nations

Universities throughout the country and the world may have different standards for the methods of

research and scholarship, including the treatment of human subjects and resources, the disclosure of

potential financial conflicts of interest, and standards and expectations for publishing results.

International collaborations raise concerns about differing standards of treatment for research subjects in

developed versus developing nations. Laws, traditions, and opinions may differ from culture to culture on

the ownership and treatment of historical and archaeological resources (for example), or the rights to

intellectual property such as oral histories.

What are the Ways to Enhance Collaboration?

Macrina points out a number of key components of a successful collaboration.[2]

They include:

f 6 12/5/12 11


4/6

Communication first, second, and throughout

As Gadlin and Jessar state, "People often assume that since they share an interest

in the same research area and have complementary skills and areas of expertise,

things will just work out. But scientific collaborations, like other important

relationships, take some forethought and some ongoing work to succeed."[3]

It is vital to establish and maintain communication throughout a project. Once a

collaboration is created, then discussion about data, ideas, and personnel issues

should occur. If two scholars plan to exchange data, personnel, or materials, they

should carefully consider whether a formal written collaboration agreement should be established. Researchers

need to communicate effectively, whether the other person is across the hall or on the other side of the globe.

Discussing in advance the roles of each scholar in a project, while understanding that the research may evolve

Parties in a collaboration should define goals in such a way that reflects the nature and scope of the

collaboration. Setting clear goals leads to shared expectations and outcomes.

The leader of the collaboration should be defined. As multiple sites or groups of scholars may be involved,

coordinating the effort among the participants requires management and communication.

When a research project changes direction, the potential impact on the participants needs to be

addressed. It is possible that authors may be added or eliminated, and general principles about these

eventualities should be discussed before they arise.

Scholars should define when the collaboration will be over, or agree on a point at which the collaboration

will be re-evaluated.

Discussing authorship in advance

Different disciplines have varying standards for determining authorship. The criteria for authorship

among collaborators should be established at the beginning of the collaboration, so all know what to

expect. But with authorship comes responsibility, so collaborators need to determine how they will

deal with the differing levels of contribution from each author. The Modern Language Association addressed this

issue directly:[1]

"Only persons who have made significant contributions and who share responsibility and accountability should be

listed as coauthors of a publication. Other contributors should be acknowledged in a footnote or mentioned in an

acknowledgments section. The author submitting the manuscript for publication should seek from each coauthor

approval of the final draft Coauthors should explain their role or describe their contribution in the publication itself

or when they submit the publication for evaluation."

The American Psychological Association, in its Ethical Principles for Psychologists and Code of Conduct, states:[4]

"(a) Psychologists take responsibility and credit, including authorship credit, only for work they have

actually performed or to which they have substantially contributed.

(b) Principal authorship and other publication credits accurately reflect the relative scientific or

professional contributions of the individuals involved, regardless of their relative status. Mere possession

of an institutional position, such as department chair, does not justify authorship credit. Minor

contributions to the research or to the writing for publications are acknowledged appropriately, such as in

footnotes or in an introductory statement."

The American Sociological Association has a very similar statement, suggesting that the position of authors' names

on the publication should reflect their relative contributions to the work.[5] On the other hand, the vast majority of

multiple author papers in economics list authors alphabetically, and authors are assumed to have made relativelyequal contributions to the work.[6]

An in-depth analysis of the changing patterns of collaboration in the field of political science, including identification

of the ethical and procedural challenges that arise in collaboration, was recently published by the American Political

Science Association.[7] Their report addresses the fact that over half of publications in the field reflect

"asymmetrical" collaborations: a tenured professor working with a non-tenured professor, or a professor and

graduate student publishing together. Five key issues raised in the report are:

How should the contribution of assistants be acknowledged in collaborative work?

What are the criteria by which an assistant's contribution to a project should be acknowledged as

co-authorship?

What should the order of authors in a co-authored work be?

f 6 12/5/12 11


5/6

How can we integrate collaborative work with graduate training in a way that encourages independent

thinking?

What should the procedures be for a discussion of any of these questions and for the resolution of

disputes?

Of course, these are important issues in any scholarly field. Rather than having clear answers that can be merely

codified in a policy, they must be re-considered each time a new collaboration is begun.

Other issues in authorship should also be considered: Who will actually write the manuscript? Who will be

responsible for managing the input from collaborators? Who will be the primary contact in dealing with thepublisher? If the research changes direction, someone expecting authorship might be disappointed, so the evolution

of a project has to be considered and anticipated as much as possible. Who will be included in acknowledgments

should also be addressed.

Discussing intellectual property issues in advance

All scholars want credit for their work, the right to earn money from sales of books and other publications, and to be

able to protect results that might have potential commercial application. Dealing with authorship and credit issues in

advance can help protect the rights of all collaborators to appropriate credit. In the case of potentially patentable

discoveries, the timing of publication can be important. While early publication usually ensures primary credit,

disclosing results early could prevent authors from being able to obtain patent protection.

If authors have different interests relating to a publication (for example, some want early publication, others want to

wait to protect intellectual property rights), conflicts can arise. In this kind of situation, early communication is vital

(as always). In addition, most institutions and grant agencies have policies regarding intellectual property andpatent procedures. These can help clarify the situation, and provide a basis for discussion and decision-making.

Managing accountability

Each institution and its researchers have to abide by certain regulations, policies, and laws. For example, there are

ones relating to working with animals, humans, or hazardous substances. Researchers also need to abide by the

codes of conduct agreed upon by their professional societies. When working with human subjects, especially in

fields such as clinical research, anthropology, or history, researchers must maintain the confidentiality of their

subjects and be aware of participants' rights. They also need to inform one another of any conflicts of interest that

they might have that relate to the project.

Conclusion

A key challenge for researchers engaged in a collaboration is to understand the main goal of the

project and what role each collaborator must play in order to achieve that goal. While collaborators

may work independently at certain stages of the project, they should always be aware of the

project's larger goal. Factors that can increase the likelihood of positive collaborative outcomes include:

Setting up and maintaining clear communication among all members of the project.

Clearly delineating roles and responsibilities.

Creating an effective management plan and fostering a high level of cooperation

Developing trust, collegiality, and a profound sense of fairness and accountability.

Lack of attention to these factors undermines the responsible conduct of research in the collaboration. Unless

addressed proactively, a number of issues, including disputes about authorship, the ownership of data, or the use of

laboratory resources, may compromise the integrity of research.

References

MLA Committee on Academic Freedom and Professional Rights and Responsibilities. (2008). Advice for

Authors, Reviewers, Publishers, and Editors of Literary Scholarship, ADE Bulletin 132 (2002): 107-11. (last

visited May 25, 2012).

1.

Macrina, F. (2000). Scientific Integrity: An Introductory Text with Cases. Second Edition. American Society

for Microbiology Press.

2.

Gadlin, H., Jessar, K. (2011). Preempting Discord: Prenuptial Agreements for Scientists, June 2, (last visited

May 25, 2012).

3.

American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct.(last


4.

f 6 12/5/12 11


6/6

American Sociological Association. (1999). Code of Ethics. (last visited May 25, 2012).5.

Jaschik, Scott. (2007). Who Gets Credit? Inside Higher Ed (last visited May 25, 2012).6.

American Political Science Association. (2006). Report of the APSA Working Group on Collaboration. (last


7.

Version Date Information

Last Updated On: 05-25-12

Take the Quiz

Take the quiz for Collaborative Research 4-1058

Go to the gradebook for this course

Go to the Main Menu

Home| Privacy Notice|Accredited CE Courses| Copyright and Disclaimer|About Us|Acknowledgements| Contact Us|Accessibility

f 6 12/5/12 11

172824433 Collaborative Research

Documents

Transcript of 172824433 Collaborative Research