Ethics VT 2017

Seminar I – Good Research Practice

By

Dibya Phuyal, Emil Edin, Lisa Unger& Fredrik Johansson

October 10th, 2017

Question

• You are refereeing an article and discover that the authors have made a great deal of a discovery you yourself made 20 years ago, but never wrote clearly about at the time – only a parenthesis buried in a long article. Now they are claiming credit for the discovery. However, you currently have an article of your own at the proof stage, and are now considering adding a section about your old discovery to underline your ownership of it.

• Would it be right to do so?

1) Will there be any ethical problems?

• Yes: Reviewer is influenced

–Would not have the thought of her/his discovery

–Can take advantage of situation

–Has power to delay/stop publication process

–Could point authors to parenthesis

–Significance of reviewed paper could be reduced

–Could resign as reviewer

• Yes! Since you intend to now write on this in your ongoing manuscript, you have been influenced

• Your actions are no longer subjective

• Can abuse the power of the peer review system in altering the review process for the authors

2) Decision or solution cause any ethical problems or conflicts?

• Yes perhaps you mentions to the authors ofthis ‘new’ discovery has been written about itfirst, and suggest them to mention it in theirpaper.

• Ask the authors to revise their manuscriptaddressing this

• Coordinate with authors in perhaps submittingpapers at the same time

• Ask the journal for a new reviewer

3) Alternative Solutions?Yes

4) Who and what will be affected in any way?

● Authors– They did work on their own

– They did not quote the reviewers long paper

– Would they be OK with shared credit?

● Journals– Could publish papers at the same time (if same Journal)

– Need to find a new reviewer (if reviewer resigns)

● Researchers– Will credit the people which publish first

Solutions

● Publish results, regardless● Resigning as a reviewer and publish results● Contact Journal and ask opinion● Contact Journal and ask to publish papers together● Contact authors and ask to quote the very long paper 20

years ago● Contact the authors and ask to publish together and resign as

reviewer● Not publish and review the paper

5) What values, interests, duties, standpointsand attitudes are involved in the use of your

solution and of the possible alternatives?

• Values• Honesty, authenticity, community, competence, fairness

• Interests: • You, the other authors, the publisher/journal, the scientific

community as a whole, general public• Duties:

• Towards the journal as a reviewer, towards science, towards yourself

• Standpoints: • Machiavellianism, Universalism, Utilitarianism, Justice theory

• Attitudes: • Good and bad attitude

6. What effects will your solution (and the alternatives) have on each of these values? What are the strengths/possibilities and the weaknesses/risks of each solution to each value? Will these solutions fit certain values and conflict with others? What values and how?

• Values– Aligns well with the solution. One of the biggest reasons

why it was chosen.– Publishing yourself breaks with most of them.– Doing nothing doesn’t impact the values that much.

Question 6

Question 6

• Interests– Serves your interests reasonably well as well as the publisher

and the other authors. The Scientific community as a whole is not really impacted.

– Publishing yourself serves your interests and is bad for the other authors and the publisher. Doesn’t matter for the community as a whole.

– Doing nothing is bad for you and the publisher.• Duties

– Correct towards the journal, science and yourself.– Publishing yourself is correct to no one.– Doing nothing is not correct to anyone either.

Question 6• Standpoints

– What’s yours is yours. Respect for the process. All followed.

– Doesn’t follow any.– Doesn’t follow any.

• Attitudes– What kind of scientific world do we want to live and work

in. If people acted as in our solution we’d be ok with that.– Publishing yourself is kind of a free for all, do what you

want attitude.– In doing nothing you are basically allowing them in a small

way to do something similar which is bad as well.

Question 7

7. What will you do to make sure that the use of the solution will be optimal with regards to ethical aspects? For instance, adapt the design of the product, use of research methods, cooperation with industry, information to stakeholders, etc? How exactly are you going to succeed with this?

• Do this kind of study?

• Be open about my actions with all involved parties and include non-involved third parties. Underline my thinking in regards to the situation and make sure that all involved are aware of the reasons behind my actions.