EFFECTING CULTURAL CHANGE IN RESEARCH ETHICS AND INTEGRITY
Encouraging a culture of research integrity
Andrew C. Rawnsley
Concordat to Support Research Integrity (2012)
Commitments to:
Maintain the highest standards of rigour and integrity in all aspects
of research
Ensure that research is conducted according to appropriate ethical,
legal and professional frameworks, obligations and standards
Support a culture of integrity and the development of researchers
Deal properly and fairly with allegations of research misconduct
Strengthen the integrity of research across the sector and review
progress collectively
What do we mean by “a culture of integrity”?
Concordat – Commitment 3
Maintaining the highest standards in research requires the right
environment. It is the responsibility of employers of researchers – and all
those undertaking, supporting or otherwise engaged with research – to
maintain a culture that nurtures good practice.
A research environment that helps to develop good research practice and
embeds a culture of research integrity should, as a minimum, include:
–
clear policies, practices and procedures to support researchers
–
suitable learning, training and mentoring opportunities to support the development of researchers
–
robust management systems to ensure that policies relating to research integrity are implemented
–
awareness among researchers of the standards and behaviours that are expected of them
–
systems within the research environment that identify potential concerns at an early stage and
mechanisms for providing support to researchers in need of assistance
Concordat – Commitment 3
researchers should take a proactive role in their own personal development
employers of researchers will:
– embed these features in their own systems, processes and practices
– work towards reflecting recognised best practice in their own systems,
processes & practices
– implement the Concordat within their research environment
Singapore Statement on Research Integrity (2010)
Research Environments
Research institutions should create and sustain environments that encourage
integrity through education, clear policies, and reasonable standards for
advancement, while fostering work environments that support research
integrity
European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2010)
Universities, institutes and all others who employ researchers, as well as
agencies and organisations funding their scientific work, have a duty to
ensure a prevailing culture of research integrity. This involves clear policies
and procedures, training and mentoring of researchers, and robust
management methods that ensure awareness and application of high
standards as well as early identification and, wherever possible, prevention
of any transgression.
While principles of integrity, and the violation thereof, have a universal
character, some rules for good practice may be subject to cultural
differences, and should be part of a set of national or institutional guidelines.
These cannot easily be incorporated into a universal code of conduct.
Montreal Statement on Research Integrity (2013)
“collaborations present special challenges”:
•
•
•
•
substantial differences in regulatory and legal systems
organizational and funding structures
research cultures
approaches to training
Customary Practices and Assumptions:
Collaborating partners should openly discuss their customary practices and assumptions
related to the research. Diversity of perspectives, expertise and methods, and differences in
customary practices, standards and assumptions that could compromise the integrity of the
research should be addressed openly.
culture
support
development
environment
nurture
good practice(s)
education
clear policies
guidance
mentoring
Two major aspects… and ‘resistances’
• Attitudinal
• Structural
The ‘there is no problem’ problem
• Researchers think that they are ethical, understand the issues
• Researchers think that they have integrity
• How to address problems not perceived to be there?
• Ethics review relies on procedural ‘rightness’ as justification
• Compliance rationale
European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity
This Code of Conduct is not a body of law, but rather a canon for
self regulation. It is a basic responsibility of the scientific
community to formulate the principles and virtues of scientific
and scholarly research, to define its criteria for proper research
behaviour, and to set its own house in order in case scientific
integrity is threatened.
Openness and integrity
“In order to stave off the steady rise of regulation and monitoring and to present a
coherent alternative to instrumental views about research, it falls
to researchers themselves to define the ethos of openness”
…”clear and coherent communication about ‘what researchers do’ and ‘how
researchers do it’ on the part of researchers themselves and those who support
researchers, as well as a willingness to discuss and share these insights widely, on the
part of institutions.”
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/02/25/cultivating-opennessthrough-research-integrity/
Aspects of organisational context that affect
ethical decisions
• Clarity and openness, allowing variety of viewpoints to be put across
openly and without fear of reprisal;
• Representation of stakeholder groups among decision-makers;
• Willingness to actively seek and listen to challenges to prevailing views;
• Willingness to devote time to decisions proportionate to complexity &
impact;
• Consultation which is justified, genuine and honest.
National Inquiry into Organisational Ethical Decision Making in the NHS
National Inquiry into Organisational Ethical
Decision Making in the NHS
building ethics and values into decision-making is not
just a way of avoiding pitfalls... effectiveness means
positively pursuing ethical values as well as more
familiar concerns such as quality and value for money...
ethics can also be a strong motivator, building a sense
of organisational identity and purpose, and connecting
individuals to the social and moral, as well as the
financial, consequences of their decisions
(clear) policies
(consistent) regulations
formal standards
formal guidance
‘training’ support
formal institutional practices
tone from the top
formal institutional practices
(clear) policies
(consistent) regulations
formal standards
formal guidance
‘training’ support
researcher(s) attitudes
researcher(s) behaviour
‘commonly accepted’ practices
customary assumptions
customary standards
customary practices
incentives
Things to reflect on…
• There is plenty of empirical evidence to show that neither
codes of conduct/practice nor ‘training’ work to enable a
culture of integrity
• Structures hinder rather than enable positive culture
• The keys to effective research integrity are… ????????