Skip Navigation

INT 601 - Lectures and Assignments

INT 601 Responsible Conduct of Research

Course Requirements: To successfully complete this course for credit you must:

1. participate in all nine modules (i.e. modules A through I). This participation includes the following components:

  • Responses to Critical Questions

Each module requires each student to respond to all of the questions posed and to post the responses on FirstClass by the date and time indicated. That is, prior to the class period in which the material will be discussed. Be concise yet thoughtful. In some instances a several paragraph response to a question may be appropriate. However, a hundred-words response is often adequate. You will be able to see compiled responses from all students posted by the instructor on the morning of the days when we meet.

  • Class Discussion Moderators and Module Editors (Reporters)

(a) Each student is assigned to be class discussion moderator for one or more class periods. You may have a co-moderator. As moderator your role is NOT to give a lecture on what other people have stated in their written responses but to engage the class in a discussion of their responses and affiliated issues raised in the readings. Please engage all class members in the oral discussion when it is your turn to serve as moderator. Call on your classmates by name whenever possible.

(b) Each student is assigned to summarize one module as the module editor.  You may or may not have a co-editor depending on the number of students in the class. Each editor or group of co-editors will publish a short summary (no more than one page per question) that describes the essence of our class findings and conclusions for each question. This summary should address issues raised in the initial written responses as well as those discussed in the class sessions. I highly recommend that you submit this summary within a week of completing the class session in which you are the editor. At latest, all summaries are due on or before Wednesday October 1 at 8:00 pm so that these summaries may be used to review the course during our last class session.

2. complete the University of Maine on-line Training Program in Financial Conflict of Interest which is accessible at http://umaine.edu/orsp/compliance/conflict-of-interest/. (Note: Read the instructions VERY carefully. If you select and complete the wrong required training you will be required to keep returning until you complete the correct training.)

3. complete the University of Maine on-line Training Program in Human Research Subjects Protections which is accessible at http://umaine.edu/research/research-compliance/institutional-review-board-for-the-protection-of-human-subjects-irb/required-training/. Follow the detailed instructions at the bottom of the web page very carefully. You must do the Human Subjects Basic Course training. Most of you will choose the subcategory of Human Subjects training for Social and Behavioral Research Investigators but some may choose the subcategory for Biomedical Research Investigators. You must complete at least one of the “elective” topics.
(Note: I highly suggest that you do this assignment before the end of the third week of the class. I will contact the IRB office one week after the last class period to confirm that you have successfully completed the training program. There is no need for you to send me any notification of completion. If you have already completed the training within the past three years, there is no need for you to pass the training again.)

4. complete Option 1, 2 or 3 below as a final project. Due: Wednesday October 1 at 8:00 pm. (i.e. the evening before the last day of class)

OPTION 1 – prepare a 5-page annotated bibliography on the responsible conduct of research related to your specific discipline and research interests.
Requirements:
(1) Provide a cover page that includes the following:
<Your Name>, INT 601, Fall 2014
Annotated Bibliography on the Responsible Conduct of Research in the <Discipline of … or Field of …>
(2) For each article entry, provide a standardized bibliographic citation (including a url if available) followed by an abstract in your own words (100 to 200 words typically) summarizing the content of the article. Ten citations is the practical minimum.
(3) Deliver the bibliography in electronic form to the First Class Assignment Folder.

OPTION 2 – select a book addressing one or more aspects of the responsible conduct of research in your filed or a book germane to ethical responsibility in your field, have it approved by the instructor, read it, and prepare a 5-page review and reflection paper in reaction to the text.

OPTION 3 – prepare a 5-page review and reflection paper in reaction to, at a minimum, Chapters 3 and 7 of the Public Domain: Enclosing the Commons of the Mind and the video titled What if the Web Really Worked For Science? by James Boyle which are both available at http://www.thepublicdomain.org/download/ The book is available also in the FirstClass folder and the video is available also at several other sites (e.g. http://www.ir-facility.org/events/irf-symposium/irf-symposium-2010/videos).


Detailed Schedule of Class Sessions

The core texts for the course are freely accessible on the web. If you have trouble downloading them from the web, copies are also posted in the FirstClass Onsrud Info folder.

Reference (1)
Steneck, Nicholas H., Introduction to the Responsible Conduct of Research, Office of Research Integrity, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2007.
Free web version and pdf version at http://ori.dhhs.gov/publications/ori_intro_text.shtml
Additional related web references: http://ori.dhhs.gov/education/products/

Reference (2)
Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering and Institute of Medicine, On Being a Scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research, National Academy Press, Third Addition, 2009.
Read online at http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=12192&page=1 or download pdf for free at  http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12192

Many of the discussion questions listed below in the Modules are drawn verbatim from the assigned materials from these two texts. If so, the reference number is indicated in the assignment. Additional documents are made available in the FirstClass Folder for the course.

Note: The module discussion approach used in the schedule that follows emulates an approach used by Elizabeth Allan, College of Education, University of Maine, in a course on teaching at the college level.

Session 1

Research Values (Tuesday, September 2, 2014) Class Discussion Video (forthcoming here)

Introductory Lecture on Ethics, Values and Law
1. Ref (1) Intro to RCR, Chap 1 Rules of the Road
2. Ref (2) On Being … , Introduction to the Responsible Conduct of Research (pp.1-3)
3. Become familiar with the following University of Maine and UMS Policy Documents before the end of the third class session. We will look at these in greater depth as specific conduct issues are raised. All of these documents are additionally posted in the FirstClass Folder.

a. University of Maine Student Handbook http://www.umaine.edu/handbook/
b. UMS Student Conduct Code http://www.maine.edu/pdf/conductcode.pdf
c. UMaine Policy & Procedures on Alleged Misconduct in Research and other Scholarly Activities http://www.umaine.edu/research/vice-president-for-research/policy-and-procedures-on-alleged-misconduct-in-research-and-other-scholarly-activities/
d. UMaine Policies & Procedures for Financial Disclosures and Conflicts of Interest in Extramurally Sponsored Activities (PDF)
http://umaine.edu/computingcoursesonline/files/2012/10/ConflictofInterestPolicy.pdf
e. Research Compliance: Protection of Human Subjects of Research
http://umaine.edu/research/research-compliance/institutional-review-board-for-the-protection-of-human-subjects-irb/
f. UMS Full Statement of Policy Governing Patents and Copyrights http://www.maine.edu/pdf/intprop.pdf

4. Optional Additional Materials: http://ori.dhhs.gov/education/products/rcr_general.shtml
5. Optional Additional Materials: Past reported cases of academic research misconduct are contained in the newsletters found at http://ori.dhhs.gov/publications/newsletters.shtml
6. Optional Additional Materials: Project on Scholarly Integrity by the Council of Graduate Schools http://www.cgsnet.org/project-scholarly-integrity

Session 2

Research Misconduct (Thursday, September 4, 2014) Class Discussion Video (forthcoming here)
1. Ref (1) Intro to RCR, Chap 2 Research Misconduct
2. Ref (2) On Being … , Research Misconduct (pp.15-18)
3. UMaine Policy & Procedures on Alleged Misconduct in Research and other Scholarly Activities, http://www.umaine.edu/research/vice-president-for-research/policy-and-procedures-on-alleged-misconduct-in-research-and-other-scholarly-activities/
4. Optional Additional Materials: http://ori.dhhs.gov/education/products/rcr_misconduct.shtml

Module A
Moderators/Editors: Meghan Capps, Anne Marie Lausier
The critical questions for Module A are
A-1 How is integrity in research monitored? Is self-regulation of integrity in research effective?
A-2 Are the insights of individual researchers or the “sifting and winnowing” insights of groups of researchers more critical in advancing physical, biological and social science?
A-3 Should other practices besides fabrication, falsification and plagiarism be considered misconduct in research?
A-4 Outline the major steps that an allegation of scientific misconduct should go through when reported on the University of Maine campus.
A-5 Which question or issue related to the readings would you most like to raise and discuss with the rest of the class?
All students respond to these questions before 8:00 PM on the evening before class.


Session 3

Protection of Human Subjects (Tuesday, September 9, 2014) Class Discussion Video (forthcoming here)
1. Ref (1) Intro to RCR, Chap 3 The Protection of Human Subjects
2. Ref (2) On Being … , Human Participants, pp. 24-25
3. “Human Participants in Research” (NC State) (18 pages – download the germane pdf), http://www.ncsu.edu/grad/preparing-future-leaders/rcr/modules/module_6.doc
4. “The Belmont Report”, http://www.impactcg.com/docs/BelmontReport.pdf
5. “The Nuremberg Code”, http://history.nih.gov/research/downloads/nuremberg.pdf
6. Optional Additional Materials: http://ori.dhhs.gov/education/products/rcr_humans.shtml

Module B
Moderators/Editors:  Joshua Case, Jeff Martin, Justin Lewin
The critical questions for Module B are
B-1 What should subjects know about proposed research and their protection before they enroll as subjects? (Ref 1)
B-2 Should subjects be allowed to enroll in experiments that either promise no direct benefit to them or cannot provide them with the opportunity to withdraw completely? (Ref 1)
B-3 To what extent do the Belmont Report and Nuremburg Code provide useful guidance?
B-4 View footage from the Milgram Study at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yr5cjyokVUs Was the knowledge gained from this study of substantial value to the social science community? Would this study likely be approved under today’s institutional review board process at the University of Maine? Why or why not? For a follow-on prisoner/guard experiment see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZwfNs1pqG0
B-5 Which question or issue related to the readings would you most like to raise and discuss with the rest of the class?
All students respond to these questions before 8:00 PM on the evening before class.

Further Assignment: Complete the University of Maine on-line Training Program in Human Research Subjects Protections. See Section 2 under Course Requirements at the top of this web page.

Session 4

The Welfare of Animals Used in Research (Thursday, September 11, 2014) Class Discussion Video (forthcoming here)
1. Ref (1) Intro to RCR, Chap 4 The Welfare of Laboratory Animals
2. Ref (2) On Being … , Animal Subjects, pp. 25-28
3. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals: Eighth Edition, 2011, Download free pdf at http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12910, Read Introduction (a.k.a. Executive Summary) and skim other portions as appropriate
Optional Additional Materials: http://ori.dhhs.gov/education/products/rcr_animals.shtml

Module C
Moderators/Editors:  Tyler Case, Parker O’Brien, Jodi Randall
The critical questions for Module C are
C-1 Are there some animals that should not be used in research? (Ref 1)
C-2 What circumstances justify pain and suffering of experimental animals? (Ref 1)
C-3 How should research animals be procured? How should they be housed and treated during experiments? (Ref 1)
C-4 Which question or issue related to the readings would you most like to raise and discuss with the rest of the class?
All students respond to these questions before 8:00 PM on the evening before class.


Session 5

Conflicts of Interest and Data Management Practices (Tuesday, September 16, 2014) Class Discussion Video (forthcoming)
1. Ref (1) Intro to RCR, Chap 5 Conflicts of Interest
2. Ref (2) On Being … , Competing Interests (pp.43-47)
3. Ref (1) Intro to RCR, Chap 6 Data Management Practices
4. Ref (2) On Being … , Treatment of Data (pp.8-11) and Intellectual Property (pp. 39-42)
5. Optional Additional Materials: http://ori.dhhs.gov/education/products/rcr_conflict.shtml and http://ori.dhhs.gov/education/products/rcr_data.shtml

Module D
Moderators/Editors:  Dan Gibson, Rachel Short
The critical questions for Module D are
D-1 Should researchers be allowed/encouraged to profit personally from their research apart from their normal compensation? (Ref 1)
D-2 What are appropriate mechanisms for managing financial conflicts of interest? (Ref 1)
D-3 Should research data belong to researchers rather than to research institutions? (Ref 1) In the absence of institutional policies what does the law say? What is the institutional policy at the University of Maine? (See http://umaine.edu/computingcoursesonline/files/2014/06/UMSIntellectualPropertyBriefing.pdf)
D-4 Should data recording practices be standardized to facilitate sharing and monitoring? If so, what recording and archiving practices could be standardized? (Ref 1)
D-5 Who should have access to underlying research data after results have been published? How can that access be provided? Who should bear the cost? How can one ensure that data won’t be tampered with?
All students respond to these questions before 8:00 PM on the evening before class.

Further Assignment: Complete the University of Maine on-line Training Program in Financial Conflict of Interest. See Section 3 under Course Requirements at the top of this web page.

Session 6

Mentor and Trainee Responsibilities (Thursday, September 18, 2014) Class Discussion Video (forthcoming)
1. Ref (1) Intro to RCR, Chap 7 Mentor and Trainee Responsibilities
2. Ref (2) On Being … , Advising and Mentoring (pp.4-7)
3. Adviser, Teacher, Role Model, Friend: On Being a Mentor to Students in Science and Engineering (1997), Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, National Academy of Science, http://books.nap.edu/books/0309063639/html/index.html (pp. 1-16 and skim pp. 65-68).
4. “Truth and Trustworthiness in Research”, by Caroline Whitbeck, [Read section on "The Moral Soundness of Trust Relationships in Research; The Relationship Between Thesis Supervisor and Supervisee"] This essay was first published in Science and Engineering Ethics, 1:4 (October 1995) 403-416. http://www.onlineethics.org/CMS/research/resessays/cw2.aspx
5. “Guidelines for Advisor/Advisee Relations: Department of History, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign” http://www.history.illinois.edu/graduate/forms/advisor/
6. Optional Additional Materials: How to Pick a Graduate Advisor
https://hst.mit.edu/sites/default/files/Barres%20BA.Neuron.80.275.2013.pdf
How to be a Graduate Advisee
http://www.cell.com/neuron/pdf/S0896-6273%2813%2901191-4.pdf
7. Optional Additional Materials: http://ori.dhhs.gov/education/products/rcr_mentoring.shtml

Module E
Moderators/Editors: Oai Ha, Marina Van der Eb
The critical questions for Module E are
E-1 What are the qualities of a good mentor? A good trainee? (Ref 1)
E-2 What are the qualities of a good research environment and how can they be fostered? (Ref 1)
E-3 What are safe or comfortable ways for graduate students to learn about the differences among the policies of individual supervisors, inquire about a potential supervisor’s policies before becoming that person’s supervisee, and to assess their own treatment by a supervisor? (Whitbeck)
E-4 Should elements of the mentor-trainee relationship be reduced to a written agreement that both parties would sign at the beginning of the relationship? (Ref 1)
All students respond to these questions before 8:00 PM on the evening before class.


Session 7

Collaborative Research (Tuesday, September 23, 2014) Class Discussion Video (forthcoming)
1. Ref (1) Intro to RCR, Chap 8 Collaborative Research
2. Ref (2) On Being … , Sharing of Research Results, pp. 29-33
3. “Mentor vs. Protégé”, Chronicle of Higher Education; 12/17/2004, Vol. 51 Issue 17, pA14-A15, 2p, 1c, http://chronicle.com/free/v51/i17/17a01401.htm (Or gain access through Fogler online publications or see the extra copy on FirstClass)
4. Optional Additional Materials: http://ori.dhhs.gov/education/products/rcr_collaboration.shtml

Module F
Moderators/Editors:  Leif Johnson, Noreen Brenner
The critical questions for Module F are
F-1 What are the benefits of collaborative research? (Ref 1)
F-2 What are the drawbacks to collaborative research and how can those drawbacks be lessened? (Ref 1)
F-3 If working collaboratively with another and using or building from the ideas or labor of your collaborator, what level of credit or acknowledgement is warranted for your collaborator in scholarly outlets if you don’t have a formal agreement? Should it be acknowledgement of contributions? Citation to documentation? Co-authorship?
F-4 Which question or issue related to the readings would you most like to raise and discuss with the rest of the class?
All students respond to these questions before 8:00 PM on the evening before class.

Session 8

Authorship and Publication (Thursday, September 25, 2014) Class Discussion Video (forthcoming)
1. Ref (1) Intro to RCR, Chap 9 Authorship and Publication
2. Ref (2) On Being … , Authorship and Allocation of Credit (p.35-38), Mistakes and Negligence (pp12-14)
3. Optional Additional Materials: http://ori.dhhs.gov/education/products/rcr_authorship.shtml

Module G
Moderators/Editors: Eric Kehoe, Moira Burke
The critical questions for Module G are
G-1 What are the accepted criteria for authorship in your field of research? If there are none, what should they be? (Ref 1)
G-2 The widely accepted ICJME Statement on Authorship indicates:”All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship, and all those who qualify should be listed. Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content. One or more authors should take responsibility for the integrity of the work as a whole, from inception to published article. Authorship credit should be based only on 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Conditions 1, 2, and 3 must all be met by each author.  Acquisition of funding, the collection of data, or general supervision of the research group, by themselves, do not justify authorship.” Should this policy be applied across all scholarly domains? Why or why not? If yes, who should determine the people to be invited to participate as co-authors and thus who controls who should be invited to meet all three conditions for a specific proposed article?
G-3 What should a researcher do if the journal that has accepted a publication will not let the researcher publish the method or results in as much detail as the researcher feels is necessary? (Ref 1)
G-4 What are the benefits or drawbacks of inserting in an article an explanation of the contributions of each author and why the authors are listed in the order shown?
G-5 Which question or issue related to the readings would you most like to raise and discuss with the rest of the class?
All students respond to these questions before 8:00 PM on the evening before class.


Session 9

Peer Review (Tuesday, September 30, 2014) Class Discussion Video (forthcoming)
1. Ref (1) Intro to RCR, Chap 10 Peer Review
2. Ref (2) On Being … , Advice, p.34
3. Responsible Authorship and Peer Review (NC State),
http://www.ncsu.edu/grad/preparing-future-leaders/rcr/modules/index.php (module 2)
4. Optional Additional Materials: http://ori.dhhs.gov/education/products/rcr_peer_review.shtml

Module H
Moderators/Editors: Derek LaBarron, Marie Daigle Thompson
The critical questions for Module H are
H-1 What information contained in a manuscript or proposal should reviewers be expected to check? (Ref 1)
H-2 Should reviewers be anonymous? Should authors be anonymous?
H-3 Some disciplines and open access journals have moved to immediate posting of non-refereed preprints with authors names credited while an article is undergoing formal peer review. What are the benefits and drawbacks of this approach?
H-4 Which question or issue related to the readings would you most like to raise and discuss with the rest of the class?
All students respond to these questions before 8:00 PM on the evening before class.

DUE DATE: Summaries of Modules by Editors, if not already submitted, are due Wednesday October 1 at 8:00 pm. Post the summaries to First Class.

Session 10

Responsibilities to Society (Thursday, October 2, 2014) Class Discussion Video (forthcoming)
1. Ref (2) On Being … , Responding to Violations of Ethical Standards (p. 19-23), The Researcher in Society (p.48-50)
2. “The Ethical Implications of the New Research Paradigm”, Scott Peter, Science and Engineering Ethics, Ja 2003; 9(1): 73-84 (PDF) (Access through Fogler Library e-journals or see Firstclass folder)
3. “In the Grip of the Python: Conflicts at the University-Industry Interface”, David Healy, Science and Engineering Ethics (2002) 9, 59-71(PDF) (Access through Fogler Library e-journals or see Firstclass folder)
4. “Towards the Conscientious Development of Ethical Nanotechnology”, Rosalyn W. Berne, Science and Engineering Ethics (2004) 10, 627-638(PDF) (optional) (Access through Fogler Library e-journals or see Firstclass folder)
5. View the video Paul Root Wolpe: It’s Time to Question Bioengineering at http://www.ted.com/talks/paul_root_wolpe_it_s_time_to_question_bio_engineering and the related blog at http://blog.ted.com/2011/03/24/you-need-to-engage-the-ethical-question-all-along-the-way-a-qa-with-paul-root-wolpe/
OPTIONAL: Among a large number of Ted talks addressing the future of biology, information technology and engineering that raise societal ethical implications include:
Gregory Stock: To upgrade is human (2003) https://www.ted.com/talks/gregory_stock_to_upgrade_is_human
Aubrey de Grey: A roadmap to end aging (2005) https://www.ted.com/talks/aubrey_de_grey_says_we_can_avoid_aging
Craig Venter: On the verge of creating synthetic life (2008) https://www.ted.com/talks/craig_venter_is_on_the_verge_of_creating_synthetic_life
Juan Enriquez: The next species of human (2009) https://www.ted.com/talks/juan_enriquez_shares_mindboggling_new_science
Jennifer Golbeck: The curly fry conundrum: Why social media “likes” say more than you might think, https://www.ted.com/talks/jennifer_golbeck_the_curly_fry_conundrum_why_social_media_likes_say_more_than_you_might_think

Module I
Moderators/Editors:  Nina Whitney, Grace Gonnella

I-1 Which questions or issues related to each of the five readings listed above would you most like to raise and discuss with the rest of the class?
All students respond to this question before 8:00 PM on the evening before class.

Class activity:
Open discussion of the three final assigned readings and any of the optional videos.
Review by editors of the key lessons of the semester’s class modules (if time permits).


Back to INT 601