Performance Benchmark N.12.B.3
Students know the influence of ethics on scientific enterprise. E/S
“If I have seen further than other men, it is because I have stood upon the shoulders of giants.”
Sir Isaac Newton wrote those words of himself in response to the many accolades he received for
his extraordinary accomplishments in physics. To his credit, Newton believed in acknowledging
the influence and scientific industry of his predecessors and contemporaries. His was an
ethically responsible approach. As has been stated in a National Academy of Science document
(http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/obas/contents/social.html), “With few exceptions,
scientific research cannot be done without drawing on the work of others or collaborating with
others. It inevitably takes place within a broad social and historical context, which gives
substance, direction, and ultimately meaning to the work of individual scientists”.
Scientific Enterprise consists of that which is known and has been developed in science based on
cumulative knowledge collected from historic times up to and including present day. Three large
constructs of scientific enterprise are: 1. Scientific Theory (an explanation or model backed by
results obtained from many tests or experiments); 2. Scientific Law (a rule which describes the
behavior of something in nature and which may be used to predict natural events); and 3.
Technology (the use of scientific discovery for practical purposes).
It is important to realize that the knowledge gained through science is amoral (neither good nor
bad). How that knowledge is utilized by humans might have consequences which are considered
moral or immoral. For example, scientists have learned that enormous energies are stored within
atoms – energies which can be released by the initiation of atomic fission and/or atomic fusion.
This is simply a fact. We have learned how to apply this knowledge in the construction of
weapons. Depending upon one’s point of view, atomic weapons are morally justifiable, serving
first to deter attack from our enemies, or if attack is launched, serving as a swift means of
retribution as we seek to defeat our enemies. Of course, atomic weapons are also viewed as
immoral, reprehensible weapons of mass destruction which indiscriminately kill civilian as well
as military targets. Certain scientists would argue that they are there to make discoveries, and
that what is done with those discoveries is not their concern. Other scientists are emphatic that
they must consider the ramifications and consequences of potential misuse of their discoveries.
Ethics in life, as well as in science, are not clear-cut.
The Merriam Webster Online Dictionary (http://www3.merriam-webster.com/opendictionary)
defines “ethics” as:
1 the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation
2 a: a set of moral principles; a theory or system of moral values; b: the principles of conduct
governing an individual or a group; c: a guiding philosophy; d: a consciousness of moral
importance
3 a set of moral issues or aspects (as rightness)
Further, the definition of “moral” is given as:
1 a: of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior ETHICAL; b: expressing or
teaching a conception of right behavior; c : conforming to a standard of right behavior; d:
sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment; e: capable of right and
wrong action…
Scientists are just as human as anyone else and, as such, must be diligent is assuring that their
personal ethics and morals do not interfere with their professional ethics and morals For
example, a scientist might personally abhor the use of human embryonic stem cells in research
on tissue regeneration. This scientist might be tempted to sabotage such research, if involved in
it, or even use fabricated data to advocate a position that adult stem cells are an equally viable
alternative. In this case, the scientist allowed his/her personal ethics to interfere with, even to
supersede, his/her professional ethics and responsibilities. Addressing this issue, the American
Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) defined professional ethics as: “those
principles that are intended to define the rights and responsibilities of scientists in their
relationship with each other and with other parties including employers, research subjects,
clients, students, etc.". (R. Chalk, M.S. Frankel, and S.B. Chafer. AAAS Professional Ethics
Project. American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1515 Massachusetts Ave. NW,
Washington, D.C. 20005. AAAS Publication 80-R-4. 1980.).
Various scientific organizations have developed codes of conduct to help their members behave
in a responsible manner. For example, in 1994, the American Chemical Society (ACS) replaced
their old (1965) The Chemist’s Creed with a revamped The Chemist’s Code of Conduct
(http://www.chemistry.org/portal/a/c/s/1/acsdisplay.html?DOC=membership%5cconduct.html)
which follows:
Chemists Acknowledge Responsibilities To:



The Public
Chemists have a professional responsibly to serve the public interest and welfare and to
further knowledge of science. Chemists should actively be concerned with the health and
welfare of co-workers, consumer and the community. Public comments on scientific
matters should be made with care and precision, without unsubstantiated, exaggerated, or
premature statements.
The Science of Chemistry
Chemists should seek to advance chemical science, understand the limitations of their
knowledge, and respect the truth. Chemists should ensure that their scientific
contributions, and those of the collaborators, are thorough, accurate, and unbiased in
design, implementation, and presentation.
The Profession
Chemists should remain current with developments in their field, share ideas and
information, keep accurate and complete laboratory records, maintain integrity in all
conduct and publications, and give due credit to the contributions of others. Conflicts of
interest and scientific misconduct, such as fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism, are
incompatible with this Code.






The Employer
Chemists should promote and protect the legitimate interests of their employers, perform
work honestly and competently, fulfill obligations, and safeguard proprietary
information.
Employees
Chemists, as employers, should treat subordinates with respect for their professionalism
and concern for their well-being, and provide them with a safe, congenial working
environment, fair compensation, and proper acknowledgment of their scientific
contributions.
Students
Chemists should regard the tutelage of students as a trust conferred by society for the
promotion of the student's learning and professional development. Each student should be
treated respectfully and without exploitation.
Associates
Chemists should treat associates with respect, regardless of the level of their formal
education, encourage them, learn with them, share ideas honestly, and give credit for
their contributions.
Clients
Chemists should serve clients faithfully and incorruptibly, respect confidentiality, advise
honestly, and charge fairly.
The Environment
Chemists should understand and anticipate the environmental consequences of their
work. Chemists have responsibility to avoid pollution and to protect the environment.
Another very detailed document was developed by the USDA Forest Service Research &
Development (http://www.fs.fed.us/research/publications/fs_code_of%20_scientific_ethics.pdf).
Their code, published in 2000 and modified in 2002, follows (please link to the complete
document for commentary and clarification of each element of code).
FOREST SERVICE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT
CODE OF SCIENTIFIC ETHICS
• I dedicate myself to the pursuit, promotion, and advancement of scientific knowledge.
• I will conduct, manage, judge, and report scientific research honestly, thoroughly, and without
conflict of interest.
• I will prevent abuse of all resources entrusted to me and endeavor to treat human and animal
subjects humanely, following established guidelines where they are available.
• I will not willfully hinder the research of others nor engage in dishonesty, fraud, deceit,
misrepresentation, or other professional misconduct.
• I will welcome constructive criticism of my personal scientific research and offer the same to
my colleagues in a manner that fosters mutual respect amid objective scientific debate.
• I will recognize past and present contributors to my research and will neither accept nor assume
unauthorized and/or unwarranted credit for another's accomplishments.
• I will claim authorship for a research product only if I am willing to be held responsible for
both the interpretation of the data and the conclusions as presented.
• I will claim authorship for a research product only if I have made a major intellectual
contribution (as part of conception, design, data collection, data analysis, or interpretation)
and made significant contributions to its preparation (write, review, or edit).
• I will not publish or use original ideas, research data, or unpublished findings of others without
written approval.
• I will refrain from duplicative publication of the same research findings as original.
• I will show appropriate diligence toward preserving and maintaining resources, such as data
records, that are entrusted to me.
Patricia A. Bolton of the Department of Energy (DOE) has written a treatise on scientific ethics
(http://www.bccmeteorites.com/Ch%2016%20Scientific%20Ethics%2006.10.02.pdf). In her
paper, she divides ethics in science into two primary categories: 1. ethics of the topics and
findings (morality – the question of whether science is good or bad) and 2. ethics of method and
process (integrity – the nature of the design, the experimental procedures, and the reporting of
the research effort). Ms. Bolton addresses, in Figure 1, eight forces she believes contributes to
scientific integrity.
Figure 1. Intervention Points: Forces that Contribute to Scientific Integrity.
(from http://www.bccmeteorites.com/Ch%2016%20Scientific%20Ethics%2006.10.02.pdf)
Bolton also categorizes errors of scientists as to the reason behind their occurrence. She includes
the categories of:
1. Honest Mistakes – Scientists can make inadvertent mistakes during design, calibration,
logging, data entry, and interpretation. Such errors, if noticed, could be corrected by the
scientists themselves, or by other scientists who review or try to replicate the research.
2. Unethical Behavior or “Scientific Misdemeanors” – These are considered unacceptable
practices. Examples of such behaviors include incomplete citation of previously published
work and skewed selection of data or results to hide or disguise observations that do not fit
the author’s conclusions.
3. Noncompliance – This refers to failures to follow practices dictated by law which may
expose a scientist or institution to legal sanctions. Examples include the ethical treatment of
human subjects and laboratory animals and the handling of dangerous materials.
4. Scientific Misconduct – Deliberate deceit and dishonesty fall into this category. Scientific
misconduct has included forged or fabricated data, falsified or invented results, and
plagiarism.
The journal Nature published a study in which 3247 scientists who had been funded by NIH
(National Institutes of Health) responded to questions regarding ethical misconduct in which they
might have engaged while conducting scientific research. The results are presented in Figure 2,
and are rather disturbing.
Figure 2: Percentage of NIH funded Scientists Who Say They Have Engaged in the Following Ethical Misconduct
(from Nature, 435, June 2005, p. 737)
Whether intentional or due to an incomplete understanding of ethical responsibility, too many
incidences have occurred and continue to appear. Educational and governmental institutions
have increasingly grown concerned; consequently, programs such as those at Dartmouth College
(http://www.dartmouth.edu/~ethics/archives/Stern_Elliott.pdf) and Roosevelt University
(http://www.roosevelt.edu/provost/pdfs/Universities%20Experiment%20With%20Classes%20in
%20Scientific%20Ethics.pdf) have been created to teach science ethics.
Performance Benchmark N.12.B.3
Students know the influence of ethics on scientific enterprise. E/S
Common misconceptions associated with this benchmark.
1. Students incorrectly believe human emotions and feelings will serve sufficiently as a
guide in making ethical decisions.
We have been taught that we will feel guilty if we make bad choices. In reality, some people
feel guilty about simple indiscretions, while others experience little guilt about major
infractions. We need to develop a cognitive appreciation, through education, of both
acceptable and unacceptable practice in science.
http://www.mindspring.com/~cunningr/pp/cc/HH03002.html
2. Students inaccurately believe that ethics is relative to particular cultures in a way that
science is not.
Students realize that different cultures throughout the world have developed unique
tolerances as to what is and what is not acceptable behavior (ethics). At the same time, they
have learned that scientists across the world utilize the same methodology while conducting
scientific research. Students may thus feel that what is considered unethical behavior to one
culture will be deemed ethical in another.
http://www.phil.vt.edu/Miller/papers/science.html
3. Students incorrectly believe science is objective while ethics is intrinsically emotional.
Students believe that scientific investigations always result in factual data, while the ethics
and morals of scientists are largely influenced by emotion. As a result, students believe
conclusions drawn following scientific experimentation are less apt to be subject to
interpretation because they are based on facts, and do not realize that as scientists analyze
data, whatever ethics those scientists possess might influence the interpretation. One need
only look at the radically different interpretations on the importance of carbon dioxide in
global warming to realize some scientists will manipulate or interpret data to have it
represent their beliefs.
http://www.phil.vt.edu/Miller/papers/science.html
4. Students incorrectly believe scientists could behave in unethical manners and never get
caught, since “non-scientists” would be unable to detect these behaviors.
While it is true that the general population might not easily notice scientific ethical
misconduct, students should be aware that scientific research is peer-reviewed and made
available for critique in scientific publications. Violations of scientific ethics are strongly
condemned by the scientific community.
http://www.project2061.org/publications/bsl/online/ch1/ch1.htm
5. Students incorrectly believe all matters can be investigated and resolved with science.
As such, ethics does not come into play when science provides facts.
There are topics which are strictly matters of ethics and morals; of those, science cannot
provide an answer. For example, through science, we have learned that embryonic stem cells
can repair or replace damaged tissue and organs. But science cannot tell us if it is proper to
destroy human embryos in order to obtain those stem cells. It is strictly an ethical question.
To some people, it means killing a potential person (the embryo) to save another person.
Other people would argue the human embryo is not far enough along in its development to be
considered a person with rights, and that harvesting its cells is in no way immoral. They
would further argue that it is unethical to not utilize this knowledge science has provided to
save an existing life. It is unlikely science will ever satisfactorily answer at what juncture
following the fusion of sperm and egg human life actually begins. That will remain an
ethical question for many, many years, no matter what laws are passed and what permissions
are granted to the scientific and medical communities.
http://www.project2061.org/publications/bsl/online/ch1/ch1.htm
Performance Benchmark N.12.B.3
Students know the influence of ethics on scientific enterprise. E/S
Sample Test Questions
1. The accompanying graphic is from a study of the distribution of ethical issues in APS
(American Physiological Society) publications from 1996 through 2004
(http://advan.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/29/2/59). According to the graphic, the major
ethical infraction during that time was:
a.
b.
c.
d.
Conflicts of Interest (conflict exists between official responsibilities and private interests)
Plagiarism (substantial unattributed textual copying of another’s work)
Authors Disputes (disputes and conflicts over who qualifies for authorship)
Redundant Publications (republishing of a part or parts of an already published article)
2. According to the National Academy of Science, which of the following are CORRECT
concerning scientific research? Scientific research:
a.
b.
c.
d.
cannot be done without drawing on the work of other scientists
involves collaborating with other scientists
takes place within a broad social and historical context
all of the above are correct
3. “That which is known and has been developed in science based on cumulative knowledge
collected from historic times up to and including present day” serves as the definition of:
a.
b.
c.
d.
scientific law
scientific enterprise
scientific theory
scientific ethics
4. The knowledge gained through scientific discovery is:
a.
b.
c.
d.
amoral
immoral
moral
all of the above
5. Patricia A. Bolton suggests deliberate deceit and dishonesty, including forged or fabricated
data, falsified or invented results, and plagiarism belongs within the category of:
a.
b.
c.
d.
honest mistakes
noncompliance
scientific misconduct
unethical behavior
6. The study of NIH funded scientists published in Nature revealed that of the Top Ten
Behaviors, the most common ethical misconduct reported (the misconduct with the overall
highest percentage of occurrence) was:
a. falsifying, or “cooking”, research data
b. changing the design, methodology or results of a study in response to pressure from
a funding source
c. using another’s ideas without obtaining permission or giving due credit
d. overlooking others’ use of flawed data or questionable interpretation of data
Top Ten Unethical Behaviors
Changing the design, methodology or results of a study in response to
pressure from a funding source
Overlooking others' use of flawed data or questionable interpretation of
data
Circumventing certain minor aspects of human-subject requirements
Failing to present data that contradict one's own previous research
Unathorized use of confidential information in connection with one's own
research
Using another's ideas without obtaining permission or giving due credit
Relationships with students, research subjects or clients that may be
interpreted as questionable
Not properly disclosing involvement in firms whose products are based on
one's own research
Ignoring major aspects of human-subject requirements
Falsifying or "cooking" research data
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Incident Percentage of Reported Behavior
7. Of the following, which one would constitute scientifically unethical behavior? A scientist:
a.
b.
c.
d.
purposely releases a virus which causes sterility in individuals with genetic disorders
discovers a methods to successfully clone mammals, including humans
publishes information describing which radioactive substances are deadliest to humans
realizes s/he made an error in experimental design, then makes public this error
Performance Benchmark N.12.B.3
Students know the influence of ethics on scientific enterprise. E/S
Answers to Sample Test Questions
1. (d)
2. (d)
3. (b)
4. (a)
5. (c)
6. (b)
7. (a)
Performance Benchmark N.12.B.3
Students know the influence of ethics on scientific enterprise. E/S
Intervention Strategies and Resources
The following is a list of intervention strategies and resources that will facilitate student
understanding of this benchmark.
1. Potential Ethical Problems and Moral Misconduct Facing Scientists
The National Academy of Sciences prepared a document titled, On Being a Scientist:
Responsible Conduct in Research. The complete treatment addresses potential ethical and
moral misconduct among scientists, and provides scenarios of ethical and moral dilemma
(from which you can link to a suggested response).
On Being a Scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research.
http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/obas/
2. The Nature of Ethics in Science
Harlan B. Miller published a paper in which he thoroughly addresses the nature of ethics and
the notion of moral status in general.
Science, Ethics and Moral Status
http://www.phil.vt.edu/Miller/papers/science.html
3. Science and Social Norms
David Resnik, of the University of Wyoming, wrote a paper in which he discusses concerns
and goals regarding science and societal norms, as well as six basic principles of research and
other ethical principles that apply to science.
Philosophical Foundations of Scientific Ethics
http://www.physics.emich.edu/mthomsen/resn1.htm
4. Science and Ethics Database
UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) has provided
an extensive, searchable database in the following areas of ethics: Database 1: Who's Who in
Ethics; Database 2: Ethics Institutions; Database 3: Ethics Teaching Programs; Database 4:
Ethics Related Legislation and Guidelines; and Database 5: Codes of Conduct
Global Ethics Observatory (GEObs)
http://www.unesco.org/shs/ethics/geo/user/?action=select&lng=en&db=
5. Ethical Violations Found in Science Publications
The journal, Advances in Physiology Education, published a detailed treatment of the major
categories of ethical violations encountered during submission, review, and publication of
scientific articles.
Ethics and Scientific Publication
http://advan.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/29/2/59
6. Extensive List of Codes of Ethics
At Illinois Institute of Technology, the Center for the Study of Ethics in the Professions has
created an exceptionally extensive website which lists over 850 codes of ethics from
professional societies, corporations, government, and academic institutions. These codes are
searchable, and available online.
Codes of Ethics Online
http://ethics.iit.edu/codes/
7. Case Studies of Scientific Fraud
Purdue University and nanoHUB (a resource for nanoscience and technology) have put
together a PowerPoint presentation which addresses scientific fraud through case studies
involving examples ranging from poor scientific practice to deliberate manipulation and
fabrication of data.
Science Ethics and the Signs of Voodoo Science
http://www.nanohub.org/resource_files/2006/11/02015/2006.10.17-hirsch-nt501.pdf
8. Guidebook on Teaching Research Ethics
Judy Stern and Deni Elliot of Dartmouth College have put together a guidebook for course
development and teaching of research ethics.
The Ethics of Scientific Research
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~ethics/archives/Stern_Elliott.pdf