1. Research Integrity and Responsible Scholarship Lecture 2: In practice
November 9, 2017
René Bekkers
Graduate School of Social Sciences
VU Amsterdam

2. About Integrity Contraventions
How ‘bad’ are they? Ideal – FFP
In which phase does it happen?
Suppose we would ask:
“How often have you seen this happen?”
“How often have you committed this?”

3. How bad is this?
Your dissertation supervisor submits an article that she has written and puts your name as first author.
You collected data to test a hypothesis but did not report about it because the hypothesized relationship was below the desired significance level.
You reported on interviews that did not take place.

5. Where does this case fit?

6. Integrity in Five Research Phases
Funds
Ideas
Data
Paper
Press

7. Course objectives

8. Readings

9. “Doing the right thing even when no one is watching”.
C.S. Lewis
“Doing the right thing even when no one is watching”.

11. Integrity contraventions
a. falsification of data b. inputting fictitious data c. secretly rejecting research results d. deliberately misusing (statistical) methods e. deliberately misinterpreting results f. plagiarizing (parts of) other people’s publications and results g. wrongly presenting oneself as a co-author h. deliberately ignoring or failing to credit other’s contributions i. culpable lack of scrupulousness when carrying out research

12. Forms of market regulation
Complete freedom: no regulation at all.
Self-regulation: traders make their own rules and enforcement system.
Legal regulation: a law prescribes the rules.
Mixed forms are also possible.

13. Market features Guilds: masters, servants, and slaves.
Closed markets: driver’s license required.
Rescue services: fire brigades and first aid
Policing: border patrol and punishment.
Doping agency: illegal drugs and detection methods.
Incentives: costs and benefits of violations.

14. Codes of conduct
Self-regulation: let professionals judge among themselves
Potentially conflicting loyalties with multiple stakeholders: university associations, professional associations, academic publishers, journal editors, funders, university policy
The general public and the Ministry of Science do not impose rules (yet)

15. Fostering Integrity Info Reflect Pledge Practice Check Punish
This course
Info
Reflect
Pledge
Practice
Check
Punish
May never happen
New Faculty Policy

16. Codes of conduct International Disciplinary European National
University
Faculty

17. Codes of conduct and policy
ESF/ALLEA: umbrella organization for science funders, researchers, academies
VSNU: university association
APA: professional association
COPE: journal editors
EC, foundations: funders
VU Amsterdam: university policy
Faculty of Social Science: faculty policy

18. ESF / ALLEA code
“It is a canon for self-regulation, not a body of law.”
“It is not intended to replace existing national or academic guidelines, but to represent Europe-wide agreement on a set of principles and priorities for the research community.”

19. ESF / ALLEA code honesty in communication;
reliability in performing research;
objectivity: capable of proof and review
impartiality and independence: from interests
openness and accessibility: of data
duty of care: with respect to participants
fairness: providing references and giving credit, treating colleagues with honesty
responsibility for the scientists and researchers of the future: mentorship and supervision

20. FSS-VU policy
Survey employees about conceptions and experiences with integrity (violations)
Ask department chairs about activities
Encourage openness of data
Establish an Ethics Review Board (cf. Internal Review Board in the US)
This course (and develop others)
Encourage debate in research groups
Appoint two Integrity counselors (VPI)

21. Ethics Review Board When do you need to apply?
How does the procedure work?
Who is on the board?
What if you disagree with an ERB decision?

22. When is ethics review necessary?
Always?
Only when ‘necessary’?
For which cases is ethics review mandatory?
Who should do it?

25. Ethical Issues Risk for researchers or participants
Minors or vulnerable participants
Personal / sensitive data
Deception and debriefing
Informed consent – active/passive
Strong incentives
Anonymity – data protection

26. Data management and storage
When do you need to store your data?
What data do you have to store, in what form, and where?
How should your data be documented?
How to deal with privacy concerns?
The University Library is developing facilities for data management

27. Assignment 1
Formulate a research question that you will answer in your conference paper.
In the paper, you reflect on a dilemma in current research practice.
Find two peer reviewers from this group.
Agree upon a deadline.

28. Integrity in 5 Phases
Info
Reflect
Pledge
Practice
Check
Punish

29. Fostering Integrity Info Reflect Pledge Practice Check Punish
Codes of conduct and Faculty policy
Assignment
Peer review

30. Why we want open science
Because it makes social science better. Others see your mistakes. To avoid mistakes, we become more careful.
Because it speeds up progress in science. Others can use your work.
Because we are paid by public money.
Because funders demand it.

31. Open science Open access publication. Open data. Open materials.
Open code.
Open software.
Openness about funding.

34. Assignment 2 Did anyone ever ask you to give access to these data?
Would you be able to retrieve the data and the script?
Would I be able to reproduce the results reported in the paper from the archived data and script?

35. Self-check ethics review
Any problems with the form?
How can we improve it?
Which ethics issues surfaced in your case?

36. Before you conduct research
Always complete the self-check.
Also when you collect data for the final assignment for this course, e.g. through interviews.