Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Browse by:

Displaying: 1-4 of 4 documents

1. The Journal of Philosophy, Science & Law: Volume > 14 > Issue: 1
Levi Wood

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
The global research enterprise has seen extensive technological, social, and financial changes in the last two decades that have dramatically changed the face of academic research. While many of these changes have had a tremendously positive impact on research progress, many of them have raised new questions about how to ensure that research is conducted responsibly. In addition, there have been some high-profile cases of error and fabrication in published works that might have been caught earlier if the enterprise had better safeguards in place. There is an ongoing discussion within the research enterprise about whether and how to establish new guidelines to ensure the integrity of the research process within this shifting environment. In this article, I survey key changes in the research environment that have opened up new questions about how to best ensure the integrity of the research process.

2. The Journal of Philosophy, Science & Law: Volume > 14 > Issue: 1
William J. Polacheck, Roger D. Kamm

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Recently, we have seen the emergence of the international laboratory in scientific research. These laboratories, characterized by internationally distributed members working to accomplish a unified goal, provide advantages such as cost savings and access to facilities and equipment. However, maintaining responsible conduct of research (RCR) in an international laboratory is complicated by the requirement for technology-mediated communication, lack of trust between local and distant group members, and cultural heterogeneity among lab members. Here we discuss issues we experienced while working in a international laboratory as part of the Singapore-M.I.T. Alliance for Research and Technology, and from our experience, we propose guidelines to maintain RCR in an international laboratory. With proper oversight and cognizance of RCR, work in an international laboratory harbors great benefit for scientists and provides unique opportunity to exchange ideas, data, and insight with scientists of distinct cultural backgrounds.

3. The Journal of Philosophy, Science & Law: Volume > 14 > Issue: 1
Camille Nebeker

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Training in the responsible conduct of research (RCR) is mandated for select trainees supported by federal funds. RCR Instructors typically address standards and accepted practices for the planning, conduct and reporting of academic research. While this focus may be relevant to future academic scientists, the majority of science graduate students pursue careers in non-academic employment sectors (e.g., government, non-profit, industry). The ethical and regulatory conventions, norms and expectations of the academic setting may not always transfer to other work environments. As such, educators should focus less on answering specific questions about standards and practices in academia, and instead design ethics education to actively engage students in a learning process that prepares them with the skills to identify and navigate ethical dimensions in a wide range of possible science professions. This paper introduces the principles of andragogy and provides recommendations for educators to consider when designing research ethics education for graduate students seeking cross-sector science careers. By applying principles that resonate with adult learning and integrating strategies that promote self-directed and life-long learning (e.g., reflective practice and collaborative projects), professional and research ethics instructional effectiveness may be enhanced.

4. The Journal of Philosophy, Science & Law: Volume > 14 > Issue: 1
Andra le Roux-Kemp

abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Obtaining informed consent from potential research participants can be fraught with difficulty at the best of times. In emergency care research, consent procedures are particularly controversial as research subjects are usually unable to voice their wishes and unable to consider the material benefits and risks of the medical procedures, treatment and research. And, an added level of difficulty is the unique nature of the emergency situation, where time is of the essence and obtaining proxy consent from a legal representative or family member is not always logistically possible. This article will consider the deferred consent procedures and regulations of emergency care research in South Africa. A comparative overview will then be provided of the relevant procedures and regulations on emergency care research in the UK, continental Europe, and the USA. The important oversight role of Resarch Ethics Committees and Institutional Review Boards in emergency care research will be emphasized in terms of the difficult ethical and legal concerns that must guide them in their decision-making responsibilities.