Ethics and Etiquette

in Scientific Research
Rules of conduct for persons in authority
How to avoid improprieties
How to tell if you're being screwed
David S. Touretzky
Computer Science Department
Carnegie Mellon University

April 2007

1
 Research Ethics Covers
Many Areas
Use of human subjects in research
Informed consent, IRB oversight

Use of animals in research

Appropriate care/use, IACUC oversight

Moral debates
Stem cell research, impact of technology
(nuclear weapons, genetic screening), etc.

Professional issues (today's topic)

Authorship, IP rights, confidentiality, etc.
2
 Avoiding Ethical Dilemmas

1. Know the rules.

How are researchers supposed to behave?
Who says so?

2. Know your rights & responsibilities.

Co-authorship
Ownership of intellectual property
Conflicts of interest
Etc.

3
 Avoiding Ethical Dilemmas

3. Learn to recognize the most

common ethical mistakes.
Misappropriation of text or ideas.
Deceptive reporting of research results.
Breach of confidentiality.

4. Take steps now to avoid conflicts

in your research group.
Or resolve them quickly with minimal
discomfort.

5. Learn from others' mistakes.

4
 Ethics Education

Scientific integrity training is now

required in many areas of the sciences.

NIH and NSF training grants require it.

Ethics training is a standard part of

medical school and business school
curricula.
But not computer science?

5
 Resources

National Academy of Sciences booklet:

On Being a Scientist

AAAS booklet:
Good Science and Responsible
Scientists

Sigma Xi:
Honor in Science
The Responsible Researcher: Paths
and Pitfalls
6
 Resources (cont.)

CMU's Center for the Advancement of

Applied Ethics and Political Philosophy
Peter Madsen offers several ethics courses

Many ethics education programs use

case studies to foster discussion.

Lots of good material on the web, e.g.,

http://bioethics.od.nih.gov
http://onlineethics.org
7
 Official Policies

CMU Faculty and Student Handbooks

contain policies on:
Plagiarism
Conflict of interest
Use of human subjects in research
Handling of allegations of misconduct in
research
Ownership of intellectual property
Privacy of computer accounts
Sexual harassment

http://www.cmu.edu/policies
8
 Official Policies

Professional and scientific societies often

have codes of ethics.
ACM: don't mislead the public
APA: don't sleep with your patients
But are they enforced?

Many scientific journals impose ethical

requirements on authors:
Release of data to other scientists
Compliance with NIH animal care guidelines
IRB approval for expts. on human subjects
Avoiding duplicate publication
9
 Issue #1: Allocation of Credit

Two forms of credit in a paper:

Co-authorship
Acknowledgments

Who gets listed as a co-author?

Lab director is co-author on all papers?

Student owes his advisor co-authorship

on at least one journal paper?

10
 Ordering of Authors

How is the ordering of authors

determined in your field?

First and last usually the key positions.

Different disciplines/cultures follow

different conventions.

11
 Co-Authorship

Rule of thumb:
A co-author should have made direct and
substantial contributions to the work (not
necessarily to the writing.)

Co-authors share responsibility for the

scientific integrity of the paper.
Penalties may apply!

David Baltimore case:

Nobel laureate was co-author on a paper
Primary investigator accused of fraud
12
 Co-Authorship in
Computer Science
Generally: authors ordered by the
amount of their contribution.
But in the Theory community, author list is
sometimes alphabetical.

Contributions may include:

Providing key ideas
Doing the implementation
Running experiments / collecting data
Analyzing the data
Writing up the results

13
 Co-Authorship in CS

No special honor to be last author?

No general consensus on lab directors

getting co-authorship.

Papers typically have 1-4 authors.

Rarely see large author lists as in physics.

But many computer scientists do

interdisciplinary work: HCI,
computational neurosci. Culture clash?
14
 Acknowledgments

People who made contributions that

don't merit co-authorship may
(sometimes must) be acknowledged
elsewhere in the paper.

Not as good as co-authorship, since it

doesn't go on a vita.

But it's good manners, and costs

nothing.
15
 Acknowledge People Who...

Contribute a good idea or coin a useful term

Provide pointers to papers for the bibliography

Help with debugging some tricky code

Help with typesetting or illustrations

Provide significant resources, e.g., loan of

equipment, tissue samples, etc.

Also acknowledge your funding agency!

16
 Ask Your Advisor:

1. What are the authorship conventions

in our field?
2. What are the authorship conventions
in your lab?
3. Are students prohibited from
submitting papers (even if sole-
authored) without your approval?
4. Who owns the code/data/manuscript?
See CMU policy on intellectual property.

Some CMU cases: Godspell, SCRIBE

17
 Example to Discuss

Professor Smith is invited to write an

article for a special issue of The Big
Important Journal.

Smith invites grad student Jones to

help with the article.

Some of the most important results are

the product of Jones' thesis research.

What should the authorship be?

18
Issue #2: Misappropriating Text

Borrowing just a sentence or two

without attribution is plagiarism.

But plagiarism is easily avoided: give

the citation.

19
 Misappropriation Example

Smith:

The parrot is a remarkable bird in

many respects. In terms of
intelligence, humor, and manual
dexterity, it is unequalled in the
avian kingdom.

20
 Misappropriation Example

Jones, wrong way:

Parrots are excellent mimics. But

the parrot is a remarkable bird in
many other respects. In terms of
intelligence, humor, and [manual]
dexterity, it is unparalleled in the
avian kingdom.

21
 Proper Attribution

Jones, right way:

Parrots are excellent mimics. But

in addition, as Smith (2005)
observes, in terms of intelligence,
humor, and manual dexterity,
[they are] unequalled in the avian
kingdom.

22
 Citation Etiquette

Cite other people's work freely and often:

Avoid antagonizing your reviewers by failing

to acknowledge their contributions.

Demonstrate your mastery of the literature.

Make new friends. (Scholars love to be

cited.)

Encourage others to cite your work in return.

23
 Misappropriation of Citations

Citations are good, but stealing

citations is not good.

Smith:

Rat head direction cells with cosine

tuning curves have been found in
parietal/retrosplenial cortex (Chen,
1989).

24
 Misappropriation of Citations

Jones, wrong way:

Some robots use inertial guidance
for maintaining heading information in
unfamiliar environments. There is
evidence for a similar mechanism in
the parietal/retrosplenial cortex of rats
(Chen, 1989).

What's wrong?

25
 Misappropriation of Citations

Jones, wrong way:

Some robots use inertial guidance
for maintaining heading information in
unfamiliar environments. There is
evidence for a similar mechanism in
the parietal/retrosplenial cortex of rats
(Chen, 1989).
Chen (1989) turns out to be an
unpublished PhD thesis that Jones has
never seen, and wouldn't comprehend if
he had.
26
Misappropriation of Citations

Jones, right way:

Some robots use inertial guidance

for maintaining heading information in
unfamiliar environments. There is
evidence for a similar mechanism in
the parietal/retrosplenial cortex of rats
(Smith, 2005, citing Chen, 1989).

27
 Misappropriation of Ideas

A researcher must not present

someone else's ideas as his or her own.
Cite your source!

Even if the originator of the idea

doesn't care about credit, it is improper
to present their idea as one's own.

28
 Citing The Source of an Idea

Right way:

Adding eye of newt to the mixture

produced a higher reaction rate and,
ultimately, a far more potent product.1
______________________

1
We are grateful to Mr. A. E. Newman, a
high school student who was visiting
our lab for the day, for suggesting this
important step.
29
Fast Track to Academic Success
1) Browse the web to find papers or tech
reports you like.
2) Download the source files, or OCR the
printed document.
3) Change the author and title.
4) Change all occurrences of I/we or
my/our accompanying citations of
the true author's work.
5) Resubmit to an obscure conference or
journal.
6) Repeat until fame and fortune achieved.
30
 Fast Track (cont.)

This technique was pioneered in the

1980s by C. V. Papadapoulos,
University of Patras, Greece.

Professor Jeannette Wing at CMU: new

category in her vita:

Papers of mine published in a

refereed journal under someone else's
name.
31
 Issue #3: Responsibilities
of a Reviewer
From Ethical Guidelines to Publications
of Chemical Research, Accounts of
Chemical Research 18(12):355-357,
December 1985:

1. Do your fair share of reviewing.

2. Promptly return the manuscript if you

are not qualified to review it.

32
 Reviewer Responsibilities

3. Judge quality objectively

With due regard to scientific standards, but

With respect for the intellectual

independence of the authors.

33
 Reviewer Responsibilities

4. Avoid potential conflicts of interest.

Either decline to review the manuscript, or
fully disclose the conflict to the editor.

In some cases, it may be appropriate to

submit a signed review, to prevent any
accusation of bias.

34
 Reviewer Responsibilities

5. Do not review manuscripts where you

have a personal or professional
connection to the author.
Your girlfriend / boyfriend / cousin.

Your colleague down the hall.

35
 Reviewer Responsibilities

6. Treat manuscripts as confidential.

Don't turn the manuscript you just
reviewed into a course handout, even if it's
wonderfully relevant.

Wait until it's published.

36
 Reviewer Responsibilities

7. Provide adequate support for your

judgments, including citations.

Wrong way:
The author's results must be wrong,
since they conflict with those of
Bovik, who invented the field.

37
Adequate Support for Judgments
Right way:

The authors should explain the

discrepancies between their results
and the seminal work of Bovik
(Short messages over long
distances, Journal of Hyperspace
Zephygrams, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-22,
January 2007.

38
 Responsibilites of a Reviewer

8. Know the literature.

Point out missing citations.

Call the editor's attention to any

substantial similarity between this
manuscript and one already published or
currently submitted to another journal.

39
Responsibilities of a Reviewer

9. Turn in all reviews promptly.

Someone's tenure case may hang on your

decision.

40
Responsibilities of a Reviewer

10. Do not use the ideas or results in a

manuscript except with permission of
the author.
You can abandon an approach the paper
shows will be unsuccessful.

But you cannot use a new technique

disclosed in the paper without first
obtaining the author's permission.

Let the editor know what you are doing!

41
 Contacting An Author

True story: scientist A submits a paper to

a leading journal.

Editor B assigns it to scientist C to review.

C thinks the data are interesting, but the

computer model is nave and the results
unimpressive. Since the model is the
focus of the paper, C recommends the
paper be rejected, and explains why.
42
 Contacting An Author

C is an experienced computer modeler.

C believes that an approach he

developed two years ago would be
much better suited to modeling A's
data, if extended in a certain direction.

C would like access to A's data, but

could do the experiment with simulated
data, or data from someone else's lab,
if necessary.
43
 Contacting An Author

C is very concerned about the

appearance of impropriety, and wants
to act in a responsible and professional
manner.

What should C do?

44
 Reviews That Sting

At some point in you career, a sharp-

tongued reviewer is going to cut you to
ribbons.

At some later point, you will review a

paper by some fool in desperate need
of a clue, and will be sorely tempted to
cut them to ribbons.

Resist this urge. Remember how it felt

when someone did it to you.
45
 Issue #4: Research Fraud

Painting mice with a magic marker to

fake the results of a genetic
experiment. (True case.)

Fabricating some missing data points in

order to complete a study in time for a
deadline.

46
 Varieties of Data Fraud

From Sigma Xi's Honor in Science

Trimming: smoothing irregularities to

make the data appear extremely

accurate and precise.
Cooking: retaining only those results

that fit the theory, and discarding

others.
Forging: inventing some or all of the

research data that are reported; even

reporting experiments that were never
performed.
47
 Favorite Excuses for
Trimming and Cooking
those outlier points must be
measurement error

they would only confuse the reader

everybody cleans up their data before

publication

48
 Famous Fabricators

Mendel cleaned up his genetics data.

Kepler fabricated data on planetary

observations to support his
controversial claim that the planets
follow elliptical orbits.

49
 Famous Fabricators

Pasteur gave a public demonstration of

what was supposed to be his new
oxygen-attenuation approach to
vaccine production.

In reality he was using a chemically

treated vaccine, an idea he stole from
Henri Toussaint (who suffered a
nervous breakdown and died.)

50
 Recent Cases

Woo Suk Hwang (South Korea):

Faked results to support his claim to have
cloned human stem cells
Coerced egg donations from female
subordinates

Eric Poehlman (U. Vermont):

Faked data in 15 NIH grant applications
worth $2.9 million over 10 years
Sentenced to 366 days in federal
prison.

51
 The Hall of Shame

NIH Office of Research Integrity

http://ori.dhhs.gov

Annual summaries of scientific

misconduct cases, and the penalties
applied.

Typically: barred for 3-5 years from

applying for federal funds or serving on
any review/advisory panels. (So ...)
52
 Issue #5: Failure to Disclose

Disclosure of potential conflicts of

interest is always a good idea.
It's insurance against accusations of
misconduct.

Failure to disclose may lead to:

An appearance of impropriety

Jail time (e.g., for violating disclosure

requirements in a stock offering.)
53
 Example of Poor Disclosure

From the back of an MIT Press book

jacket:

This wonderfully lucid book

describes what history may judge to
be the second state in the evolution
of <stuff>... It may take generations
to unfold the implications of this new
species of <artifact> -- but <author>
and his colleagues have already
made an impressive beginning.
54
 What's Not Disclosed?

The endorser is the author's thesis

advisor, and hence one of the
colleagues being lauded.

The endorser has a financial interest in

the company that is commercializing
the artifact described in the book.

55
 Talking to the Public

In general, scientists should not

announce discoveries to the public
before they have undergone peer
review.

Fleishman and Pons cold fusion case.

Deliberately avoiding peer review for

personal gain may constitute
professional misconduct.

56
 Talking to the Public

Technical issues sometimes have to be

simplified when explaining research to
the public, but:

1) Don't oversell your results.

2) Don't allow others (e.g., a reporter, or

a company you're working with) to
hype your results to make the story
more exciting.
57
 Talking to the Public

3) Make sure the technical details are

available at the time of any public
announcements, so the facts can be
checked by any scientist who cares to
do so.

4) Don't present a shoddy and over-

hyped undergraduate research project
as The Carnegie Mellon Study unless
the Provost gives permission to attach
CMU's name to it.
58
 Etiquette in the Scientific
Community

Pointing out flaws in competing

approaches is fine. But be respectful of
other researchers working in your area.

Who do you think is going to be

reviewing your papers and grant
proposals?

59
 Etiquette

Praise good behavior in public.

Criticize bad behavior (e.g., failure to

cite) in private.

If public criticism is necessary, stick to

objective facts. Personal attacks are
never appropriate.

60
 Dealing with Problems

Get your advisor's advice.

If you have a problem with your

advisor, discuss it with him or her
before seeking outside opinions.

If necessary, speak confidentially with

some other senior scientist whose
opinions you respect.

61
 Dealing with Problems (cont.)

Sometimes misunderstandings or
unhappy situations can be cleaned up
through mediation by a third party.

In the event of serious misconduct,

charges may be filed with the Provost's
office.

The university has a formal policy for

handling misconduct allegations.
62
 Handling Misconduct

Handle allegations of misconduct with

as much confidentiality as possible.

People's careers are at stake.

Remember that there are two sides to

every story.

63
 Conclusion

Ethics education should help you to:

Understand the rules of professional
behavior, and the reasons for them.
Know your rights.
Meet your responsibilities.

Most basic rule of all:

Don't do anything that would embarrass
you if people found out about it.
(Thanks, mom.)
64