Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
January 2020
We report a randomized trial of a research ethics training intervention designed to enhance ethics communication in university science and engineering laboratories, focusing specifically on authorship and data management. The intervention is a project-based research ethics curriculum that was designed to enhance the ability of science and engineering research laboratory members to engage in reason giving and interpersonal communication necessary for ethical practice. The randomized trial was fielded in active faculty-led laboratories at two US research-intensive institutions.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAlthough much of the focus on responsible conduct in research has been defined by courses or online training, it is generally understood that this is less important than what happens in the research environment. On the assumption that providing faculty with tools and resources to address the ethical dimensions of the practice of research would be useful, a new workshop was convened ten times across seven academic institutions and at the annual meeting of a professional society. Workshops were attended by 91 faculty, 71 (78% response rate) of whom completed evaluations strongly supportive of the value of the workshop.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFDespite more than 25 years of a requirement for training in the responsible conduct of research (RCR), there is still little consensus about what such training should include, how it should be delivered, nor what constitutes "effectiveness" of such training. This lack of consensus on content, approaches and outcomes is evident in recent data showing high variability in the development and implementation of RCR instruction across universities and programs. If we accept that one of the primary aims of instruction in RCR/research ethics is "to foster a community of social responsibility" (Antes et al.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Empir Res Hum Res Ethics
December 2015
Requirements for training in responsible conduct of research have significantly increased over the past 25 years, despite the absence of evidence for a substantial impact. One of the challenges has been to choose among the many possible goals that might define outcomes. Although much of the focus of research has been on changes in knowledge or skills, a case can be made that attitudes and perceptions are at least as important.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Empir Res Hum Res Ethics
April 2013
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) training grant requirement to provide training in the responsible conduct of research (RCR) is now more than 20 years old. Implicit in the requirement is that this training will have an impact not only on what trainees know, but on what they know how to do. There is, however, a range of responses about what skills are seen to be necessary for the ethical practice of science.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFPurpose: To identify existing responsible conduct of research (RCR) instructors' goals for RCR education.
Method: E-mail requests were sent to the 116 recipients of National Institutes of Health (NIH) training grants awarded in 2000. Contacts were successfully made with 92 of the recipients, and 84 (91%) identified one or more RCR instructors for their grants.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics
June 2007
EDUCATION IN RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT OF RESEARCH (RCR) has been a required part of training for students on U. S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) training grants for over 15 years.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFResponsible conduct of research (RCR) courses are widely taught, but little is known about the purposes or effectiveness of such courses. As one way to assess the purposes of these courses, students were surveyed about their perspectives after recent completion of one of eleven different research ethics courses at ten different institutions. Participants (undergraduate and graduate students, post-doctoral fellows and faculty, staff and researchers) enrolled in RCR courses in spring and fall of 2003 received a voluntary, anonymous survey from their instructors at the completion of the course.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF