1
|
Hildt E, Laas K, Miller CZ, Taylor S. Student views on the culture of STEM research laboratories: Results from an interview study. Account Res 2024; 31:100-137. [PMID: 35912949 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2109018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/16/2022]
Abstract
In this article, we present the results of 30 ethnographic interviews in which we asked STEM graduate and undergraduate students at a Midwest university in the United States about topics related to the culture of their research group, how group members communicate and interact, and their experience with ethical issues that arise within the laboratory. Here we focus on the culture of research laboratories and describe the key categories that emerged through analysis, including communication, community structure, governance, and collaboration that influence and shape lab culture. We also consider the critical role of the principal investigator (PI) to influence conditions in the lab that facilitate or inhibit lab culture and the subsequent effects on student feelings and behaviors, interpersonal communication, collaboration, work output, and ethics. Our findings suggest that the quality of research and the wellbeing of the lab members depend not only on purely scientific factors and routine research practices but are also dependent on the culture of the lab as it manifests in interpersonal relationships. The interviews reveal the critical role students ascribe to the PI in shaping the lab culture. Based on this study, we suggest how ethical lab cultures might be encouraged.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elisabeth Hildt
- Center for the Study of Ethics in the Professions, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Kelly Laas
- Center for the Study of Ethics in the Professions, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| | - Christine Z Miller
- Design Management, School of Business Innovation, Savannah College of Art and Design, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Stephanie Taylor
- Center for the Study of Ethics in the Professions, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, Illinois, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Resnik DB. Biosafety, biosecurity, and bioethics. Monash Bioeth Rev 2024:10.1007/s40592-024-00204-3. [PMID: 39078602 DOI: 10.1007/s40592-024-00204-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/04/2024] [Indexed: 07/31/2024]
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of biosafety in the biomedical sciences. While it is often assumed that biosafety is a purely technical matter that has little to do with philosophy or the humanities, biosafety raises important ethical issues that have not been adequately examined in the scientific or bioethics literature. This article reviews some pivotal events in the history of biosafety and biosecurity and explores three different biosafety topics that generate significant ethical concerns, i.e., risk assessment, risk management, and risk distribution. The article also discusses the role of democratic governance in the oversight of biosafety and offers some suggestions for incorporating bioethics into biosafety practice, education, and policy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David B Resnik
- National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 111 Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Blatch-Jones AJ, Lakin K, Thomas S. A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture. F1000Res 2024; 13:324. [PMID: 38826614 PMCID: PMC11140362 DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.147599.1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 06/18/2024] [Indexed: 06/04/2024] Open
Abstract
Background The crisis in research culture is well documented, covering issues such as a tendency for quantity over quality, unhealthy competitive environments, and assessment based on publications, journal prestige and funding. In response, research institutions need to assess their own practices to promote and advocate for change in the current research ecosystem. The purpose of the scoping review was to explore ' What does the evidence say about the 'problem' with 'poor' research culture, what are the benefits of 'good' research culture, and what does 'good' look like?' Aims To examine the peer-reviewed and grey literature to explore the interplay between research culture, open research, career paths, recognition and rewards, and equality, diversity, and inclusion, as part of a larger programme of activity for a research institution. Methods A scoping review was undertaken. Six databases were searched along with grey literature. Eligible literature had relevance to academic research institutions, addressed research culture, and were published between January 2017 to May 2022. Evidence was mapped and themed to specific categories. The search strategy, screening and analysis took place between April-May 2022. Results 1666 titles and abstracts, and 924 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 253 articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. A purposive sampling of relevant websites was drawn from to complement the review, resulting in 102 records included in the review. Key areas for consideration were identified across the four themes of job security, wellbeing and equality of opportunity, teamwork and interdisciplinary, and research quality and accountability. Conclusions There are opportunities for research institutions to improve their own practice, however institutional solutions cannot act in isolation. Research institutions and research funders need to work together to build a more sustainable and inclusive research culture that is diverse in nature and supports individuals' well-being, career progression and performance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda Jane Blatch-Jones
- School of Healthcare Enterprise and Innovation, University of Southampton, Southampton, England, SO16 7NS, UK
| | - Kay Lakin
- Hatch, School of Healthcare Enterprise and Innovation, University of Southampton, Southampton, England, SO16 7NS, UK
| | - Sarah Thomas
- Hatch, School of Healthcare Enterprise and Innovation, University of Southampton, Southampton, England, SO16 7NS, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
McCray AT, Van Vactor D, Gould J, Li X, Patrnogić J, Shamu C, Walsh MC. Research culture in biomedicine: what we learned, and what we would like to do about it. Commun Biol 2024; 7:546. [PMID: 38714909 PMCID: PMC11076589 DOI: 10.1038/s42003-024-06237-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2023] [Accepted: 04/24/2024] [Indexed: 05/12/2024] Open
Abstract
This comment reports on work done at Harvard Medical School to identify areas for improvement in research rigor, reproducibility, and responsibility in pursuit of continued research excellence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexa T McCray
- Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - David Van Vactor
- Blavatnik Institute of Cell Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - James Gould
- Office for Postdoctoral Fellows, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Xiuqi Li
- Blavatnik Institute of Cell Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jelena Patrnogić
- Blavatnik Institute of Cell Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Caroline Shamu
- Department of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Mary C Walsh
- Maidstone Consulting Group, LLC, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Fowler LA, Quiñones-Cordero MM, Sidani JE, Bernhart JA, Mendoza-Vasconez AS, Bannon SM, Unni EJ. The urgency of restructuring the landscape of behavioral medicine: Commentary from early-career diversity institute scholars. Transl Behav Med 2024; 14:149-155. [PMID: 37897410 PMCID: PMC10890817 DOI: 10.1093/tbm/ibad068] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/30/2023] Open
Abstract
Structural and systemic barriers entrenched in academia have sustained for decades, and resulted in a lack of diversity in leadership positions, inequitable workloads for women and underrepresented racial/ethnic groups, and increasing issues with retention of faculty, particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic. Increasing opposition to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts in higher education via legislation, policies, and general anti-DEI sentiment contextualizes the importance of prioritizing DEI. The goal of this commentary is to open discussion among academic institutions regarding changes in DEI culture that will facilitate the growth of diverse early-career faculty (ECF). We use an adapted framework which incorporates DEI into a faculty competency model to (i) guide our discussion of the rationale for restructuring academic systems to promote DEI and (ii) recommend strategies for institutional progress for ECF that can translate across academic institutions. Implementing policies and practices that seek to recruit, retain, and support historically underrepresented ECF are needed, and may involve faculty mentorship programs, establishing equitable funding mechanisms, reforming faculty evaluation practices, and examining and correcting inequities in faculty workloads. The onus is on institutions to recognize and replace the exclusionary practices and biases that have existed within their walls, and continuously promote and monitor their DEI efforts and initiatives to ensure their efficacy. Inclusive academic cultures that demonstrate their value of diversity and commitment to equity promotion at all levels of the organization, including among ECF, are necessary for ensuring excellence in scholarship in academia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauren A Fowler
- Sexuality, Health, and Gender Center, Brown School of Social Work, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Maria M Quiñones-Cordero
- Elaine C. Hubbard Center for Nursing Research on Aging, School of Nursing, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA
| | - Jaime E Sidani
- Department of Behavioral & Community Health Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - John A Bernhart
- Department of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA
| | | | - Sarah M Bannon
- Brain Injury Research Center, Department of Rehabilitation and Human Performance, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| | - Elizabeth J Unni
- Department of Social, Behavioral, and Administrative Sciences, Touro University College of Pharmacy, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
De Peuter S, Dierickx K, Meganck M, Lerouge I, Vandevelde W, Storms G. Mismatch in perceptions of the quality of supervision and research data management as an area of concern: Results from a university-wide survey of the research integrity culture at a Belgian university. Account Res 2024:1-32. [PMID: 38374543 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2024.2318245] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2023] [Accepted: 02/09/2024] [Indexed: 02/21/2024]
Abstract
Researchers of KU Leuven, a large Belgian university, were invited to complete a bespoke questionnaire assessing their attitudes toward research integrity and the local research culture, with specific emphasis on the supervision of junior researchers. A total of 7,353 invitations were sent via e-mail and 1,866 responses were collected (25.3% response rate), of which 1,723 responses are reported upon here. Some of the findings are relevant to the broader research community. Whereas supervisors evaluated their supervision of junior researchers almost unanimously as positive, fewer supervisees evaluated it as such. Data management emerged as an area of concern, both in terms of reviewing raw data and of data storage. More female than male professors emphasized open communication and supported their supervisees' professional development and personal well-being. At the same time, fewer female professors felt safe to speak up than male professors. Finally, researchers who obtained their master's degree outside Europe evaluated their supervision and KU Leuven's research culture more positively than researchers with a master's degree from KU Leuven. The results of the survey were fed back to the university's board and several bodies and served as input to update the university's research policy. Faculties and departments received a detailed report.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven De Peuter
- Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - K Dierickx
- Faculty of Medicine, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - M Meganck
- Faculty of Engineering Technology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - I Lerouge
- Research Coordination Office, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - W Vandevelde
- Research Coordination Office, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - G Storms
- Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Haven T, Bouter L, Mennen L, Tijdink J. Superb supervision: A pilot study on training supervisors to convey responsible research practices onto their PhD candidates. Account Res 2023; 30:574-591. [PMID: 35475492 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2022.2071153] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
One way to strengthen research integrity, is through supervision. According to previous research, a supervisor should be well-versed in responsible research practices (RRPs) and possess the necessary interpersonal skills to convey RRPs. We developed a 3-day pilot training for PhD supervisors that combined RRPs and interpersonal skills. Our aim was to assess: perceptions regarding supervision skills (before and after the pilot) and participants' views on combining RRPs and interpersonal skills. Before and after the pilot, we sent the Research Supervision Quality Evaluation survey to the participating PhD supervisors and their PhD candidates. The pilot was concluded with a focus group where participants deliberated over the combination of training in interpersonal skills and RRPs and whether such training should become compulsory. Both supervisors and PhD candidates were more positive about the supervisor's interpersonal skills and the ability to foster RRPs after the training. Participants were enthusiastic about the training's dual focus but believed that making the training compulsory would be undesirable. The results highlight the potential of RRPs training for supervisors. However, caution is warranted, as the results regard a small sample of volunteering supervisors, underscoring the need for larger programs to foster responsible supervision that are rigorously evaluated.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tamarinde Haven
- QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Lex Bouter
- Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Louise Mennen
- Mennen Training & Consultancy, Haarlem, The Netherlands
| | - Joeri Tijdink
- Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Ethics, Law and Humanities, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Resnik DB, Stewart CN, Williams F, Thiele C, Yamada KM, Barker K. Ethical decision-making and role conflict in managing a scientific laboratory. Account Res 2023:1-24. [PMID: 37482770 PMCID: PMC10822020 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2236553] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2023] [Accepted: 07/11/2023] [Indexed: 07/25/2023]
Abstract
Scientists who manage research laboratories often face ethical dilemmas related to conflicts between their different roles, such as researcher, mentor, entrepreneur, and manager. It is not known how often uncertainty about conflicting role obligations leads scientists to engage in unethical conduct, but this probably occurs more often than many people would like to think. In this paper, we reflect on ethical decision-making in scientific laboratory management with special attention to how different roles create conflicting obligations and expectations that may produce moral uncertainty and lead to violations of research norms, especially when combined with self-interest and other factors that increase the risk of misbehavior. We also offer some suggestions and guidance for investigators and research institutions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David B. Resnik
- National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, NC, USA
| | - C. Neal Stewart
- Department of Plant Sciences and Center for Agricultural Synthetic Biology, University of Tennessee
| | - Faustine Williams
- National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities, National Institutes of Health
| | - Carol Thiele
- National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health
| | - Kenneth M. Yamada
- National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research, National Institutes of Health
| | - Kathy Barker
- School of Public Health, University of Washington
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Haven TL, Abunijela S, Hildebrand N. Biomedical supervisors' role modeling of open science practices. eLife 2023; 12:83484. [PMID: 37211820 DOI: 10.7554/elife.83484] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2022] [Accepted: 05/04/2023] [Indexed: 05/23/2023] Open
Abstract
Supervision is one important way to socialize Ph.D. candidates into open and responsible research. We hypothesized that one should be more likely to identify open science practices (here publishing open access and sharing data) in empirical publications that were part of a Ph.D. thesis when the Ph.D. candidates' supervisors engaged in these practices compared to those whose supervisors did not or less often did. Departing from thesis repositories at four Dutch University Medical centers, we included 211 pairs of supervisors and Ph.D. candidates, resulting in a sample of 2062 publications. We determined open access status using UnpaywallR and Open Data using Oddpub, where we also manually screened publications with potential open data statements. Eighty-three percent of our sample was published openly, and 9% had open data statements. Having a supervisor who published open access more often than the national average was associated with an odds of 1.99 to publish open access. However, this effect became nonsignificant when correcting for institutions. Having a supervisor who shared data was associated with 2.22 (CI:1.19-4.12) times the odds to share data compared to having a supervisor that did not. This odds ratio increased to 4.6 (CI:1.86-11.35) after removing false positives. The prevalence of open data in our sample was comparable to international studies; open access rates were higher. Whilst Ph.D. candidates spearhead initiatives to promote open science, this study adds value by investigating the role of supervisors in promoting open science.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tamarinde L Haven
- Danish Centre for Studies in Research and Research Policy, Department of Political Science, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Susan Abunijela
- QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Nicole Hildebrand
- QUEST Center for Responsible Research, Berlin Institute of Health at Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Pizzolato D, Dierickx K. The Mentor's Role in Fostering Research Integrity Standards Among New Generations of Researchers: A Review of Empirical Studies. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS 2023; 29:19. [PMID: 37160826 DOI: 10.1007/s11948-023-00439-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2021] [Accepted: 04/19/2023] [Indexed: 05/11/2023]
Abstract
Promoting research integrity practices among doctoral candidates and early career researchers is important for creating a stable and healthy research environment. In addition to teaching specific technical skills and knowledge, research supervisors and mentors inevitably convey research practices, both directly and indirectly. We conducted a scoping review to summarise the role of mentors in fostering research integrity practices, mentors' responsibilities and the role that institutions have in supporting good mentorship. We searched five different databases and included studies that used an empirical methodology. After searching, a total of 1199 articles were retrieved, of which 24 were eligible for analysis. After snowballing, a total of 35 empirical articles were selected. The review discusses various themes such as the importance of good mentorship, poor mentorship practices, virtues and qualities of mentors, responsibilities and activities of mentors, group mentoring and responsibilities of the institution in supporting good mentorship. This review demonstrates the importance of mentors instilling responsible research practices and attitudes, and promoting research integrity among their mentees. Mentors are responsible for providing explicit guidance and for acting as good role models. The review highlights how poor mentorship can have a bad impact on the research climate. In addition, the review highlights the important influence that institutions can have in supporting mentorship.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Daniel Pizzolato
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium.
| | - Kris Dierickx
- Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Law, KU Leuven, B-3000, Leuven, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Resnik DB, Lee E, Jirles B, Smith E, Barker K. For the "good of the lab": Insights from three focus groups concerning the ethics of managing a laboratory or research group. Account Res 2023; 30:199-218. [PMID: 34591708 PMCID: PMC8964830 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2021.1983799] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
To obtain some exploratory, qualitative data on ethical issues and values in managing a research laboratory, we conducted three focus groups with experienced investigators and laboratory managers. After validating the focus group transcripts for accuracy, two coders used deductive and inductive coding to develop themes from the text. Participants regarded ethics as important in managing a laboratory (or research group) for various reasons, ranging from conducting research with integrity to exhibiting leadership and promoting an ethical research climate. Participants identified many different types of ethical issues that arise in managing a research laboratory, including issues involving the management people, financial and material resources, projects, and data. An overarching ethical dilemma identified by participants was balancing the desire for productivity against apparently competing values, such as treating people fairly and promoting the wellbeing of individuals. Participants also indicated that graduate and post-graduate education and training did not prepare them to deal with the ethical, financial, interpersonal, and other issues related to managing a research laboratory, and that communication and leadership are crucial to managing a research laboratory ethically.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David B Resnik
- Bioethicist, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC
| | - Edith Lee
- Office of Fellows' Career Development, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC
| | - Bill Jirles
- Program Analyst, Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC
| | - Elise Smith
- Assistant Professor of Preventative Medicine and Community Health, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX
| | - Kathy Barker
- Clinical Assistant Professor, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
McIntosh T, Antes AL, Schenk E, Rolf L, DuBois JM. Addressing serious and continuing research noncompliance and integrity violations through action plans: Interviews with institutional officials. Account Res 2023:1-33. [PMID: 36896610 PMCID: PMC10493235 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2187292] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/06/2023] [Accepted: 03/01/2023] [Indexed: 03/11/2023]
Abstract
Serious and continuing research noncompliance and integrity violations undermine the quality of research and trust in science. When researchers engage in these behaviors, institutional officials (IOs) often develop corrective action plans. Ideally, such plans address the root causes so noncompliance or research integrity violations discontinue. The aim of this study was to identify what IOs perceive as causes and action plan activities typically prescribed. We conducted semi-structured in-depth interviews with 47 IOs at research institutions across the U.S. including: institutional review board and institutional animal care and use committee chairs and directors, chief research officers, research compliance and integrity officers, and institutional conflicts of interest chairs and directors. The most common root causes identified were: 1) lack of knowledge or training, 2) failure to provide research team supervision, and 3) researcher attitudes toward compliance. The most common action plan activities include: 1) retraining in compliance or research integrity, 2) follow-up and hands-on involvement with the researcher, and 3) mandated oversight or mentoring. Because the most commonly identified action plan activities fail to adequately address the majority of root causes, our findings suggest a need for IOs to rethink existing approaches to action plan development to more effectively target root causes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tristan McIntosh
- Bioethics Research Center, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Alison L Antes
- Bioethics Research Center, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Emily Schenk
- Bioethics Research Center, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - Liz Rolf
- Bioethics Research Center, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| | - James M DuBois
- Bioethics Research Center, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Saint Louis, MO, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Antes AL, McIntosh TJ, Solomon Cargill S, Bruton S, Baldwin K. Principal Investigators' Priorities and Perceived Barriers and Facilitators When Making Decisions About Conducting Essential Research in the COVID-19 Pandemic. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS 2023; 29:8. [PMID: 36864367 PMCID: PMC9980856 DOI: 10.1007/s11948-023-00430-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2022] [Accepted: 01/21/2023] [Indexed: 06/18/2023]
Abstract
At the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, stay-at-home orders disrupted normal research operations. Principal investigators (PIs) had to make decisions about conducting and staffing essential research under unprecedented, rapidly changing conditions. These decisions also had to be made amid other substantial work and life stressors, like pressures to be productive and staying healthy. Using survey methods, we asked PIs funded by the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation (N = 930) to rate how they prioritized different considerations, such as personal risks, risks to research personnel, and career consequences, when making decisions. They also reported how difficult they found these choices and associated symptoms of stress. Using a checklist, PIs indicated those factors in their research environments that made their decisions easier (i.e., facilitators) or more difficult (i.e., barriers) to make. Finally, PIs also indicated how satisfied they were with their decisions and management of research during the disruption. Descriptive statistics summarize PIs' responses and inferential tests explore whether responses varied by academic rank or gender. PIs overall reported prioritizing the well-being and perspectives of research personnel, and they perceived more facilitators than barriers. Early-career faculty, however, rated concerns about their careers and productivity as higher priorities compared to their senior counterparts. Early-career faculty also perceived greater difficulty and stress, more barriers, fewer facilitators, and had less satisfaction with their decisions. Women rated several interpersonal concerns about their research personnel more highly than men and reported greater stress. The experience and perceptions of researchers during the COVID-19 pandemic can inform policies and practices when planning for future crises and recovering from the pandemic.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison L Antes
- Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
| | - Tristan J McIntosh
- Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Stephanie Solomon Cargill
- Gnaegi Center for Health Care Ethics, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO, USA
- Castle IRB, Chesterfield, MO, USA
| | - Samuel Bruton
- School of Humanities, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS, USA
| | - Kari Baldwin
- Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Ott AW, Sol-Church K, Deshpande GM, Knudtson KL, Meyn SM, Mische SM, Taatjes DJ, Sturges MR, Gregory CW. Rigor, Reproducibility, and Transparency in Shared Research Resources: Follow-Up Survey and Recommendations for Improvements. J Biomol Tech 2022; 33:3fc1f5fe.fa789303. [PMID: 36910580 PMCID: PMC10001929 DOI: 10.7171/3fc1f5fe.fa789303] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
Rigor, reproducibility, and transparency (RR&T) are essential components of all scientific pursuits. Shared research resources, also known as core facilities, are on the frontlines of ensuring robust RR&T practices. The Association of Biomolecular Resource Facilities Committee on Core Rigor and Reproducibility conducted a follow-up survey 4 years after the initial 2017 survey to determine if core facilities have seen a positive impact of new RR&T initiatives (including guidance from the National Institutes of Health, new scientific journal requirements on transparency and data provenance, and educational tools from professional organizations). While there were fewer participants in the most recent survey, the respondents' opinions on the role of core facilities and level of best practices adoption remained the same. Overall, the respondents agreed that procedures should be implemented by core facilities to ensure scientific RR&T. They also indicated that there is a strong correlation between institutions that emphasize RR&T and core customers using this expertise in grant applications and publications. The survey also assessed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on core operations and RR&T. The answers to these pandemic-related questions revealed that many of the strategies aimed at increasing efficiencies are also best practices related to RR&T, including the development of standard operating procedures, supply chain management, and cross training. Given the consistent and compelling awareness of the importance of RR&T expressed by core directors in 2017 and 2021 contrasted with the lack of apparent improvements over this time period, the authors recommend an adoption of RR&T statements by all core laboratories. Adhering to the RR&T guidelines will result in more efficient training, better compliance, and improved experimental approaches empowering cores to become "rigor champions."
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew W Ott
- Northwestern University EvanstonIllinois60208 USA
| | | | | | | | - Susan M Meyn
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center NashvilleTennessee37232 USA
| | - Sheenah M Mische
- New York University Langone Medical Center New YorkNew York10016 USA
| | - Douglas J Taatjes
- Larner College of Medicine University of Vermont BurlingtonVermont05405 USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
A typology of principal investigators based on their human capital: an exploratory analysis. JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER 2022. [DOI: 10.1007/s10961-022-09935-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
AbstractThere is burgeoning literature on principal investigators (PIs) and their influential role in science, technology transfer and research commercialisation. However, there is yet no analysis of this actor from the perspective of their human capital (HC), i.e., the combination of knowledge, abilities and skills that they possess. Consequently, the purpose of this paper is to fill this gap by identifying whether a range of different PI profiles exists, based on their different HC. A cluster analysis was developed using a database comprised of 224 PIs of research teams, from a wide range of scientific fields. Three different PI profiles were identified, research-oriented PIs, accomplished PIs, management-focused PIs. The relationship between each of these profiles and their performance was analysed at both individual and research team level, and our findings reinforce the idea that there is not a size that fits all. Indeed, contrary to the ‘more is better’ statement, higher levels of HC are not necessarily connected to better results, our findings suggested an adequate combination of HC as the best option for PIs. Results of the relationship between PI gender, performance and the three different PI profiles have been examined, as well.
Collapse
|
16
|
Solomon ED, English T, Wroblewski M, DuBois JM, Antes AL. Assessing the climate for research ethics in labs: Development and validation of a brief measure. Account Res 2022; 29:2-17. [PMID: 33517782 PMCID: PMC8333187 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2021.1881891] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
The environment researchers work in influences their ethical decisions and behavior. A "climate" for research ethics in a research lab exists when members of the lab perceive that the group values and is committed to principles of research ethics. In this study, we aimed to develop a short, reliable and valid measure assessing perceptions of climate for research ethics at the lab level. The resulting measure, Lab Climate for Research Ethics, was developed using standard scale development guidelines. In a large sample of postdoctoral researchers (N = 570), we found preliminary evidence that the new measure has adequate internal consistency reliability. It was also correlated with an existing measure of climate for research ethics and was not correlated with social desirability, demonstrating evidence of construct validity. The new measure can be used in a variety of contexts, including research administrators seeking information about climate within labs across an institution and researchers who study lab environments.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Erin D. Solomon
- Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Tammy English
- Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Matthew Wroblewski
- Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - James M. DuBois
- Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Alison L. Antes
- Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Campus Box 8005, 4523 Clayton Avenue, St. Louis, MO, 63110
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Abstract
Researchers must conduct research responsibly for it to have an impact and to safeguard trust in science. Essential responsibilities of researchers include using rigorous, reproducible research methods, reporting findings in a trustworthy manner, and giving the researchers who contributed appropriate authorship credit. This "how-to" guide covers strategies and practices for doing reproducible research and being a responsible author. The article also covers how to utilize decision-making strategies when uncertain about the best way to proceed in a challenging situation. The advice focuses especially on graduate students, but is appropriate for undergraduates and experienced researchers. It begins with an overview of responsible conduct of research, research misconduct, and ethical behavior in the scientific workplace. The takeaway message is that responsible conduct of research requires a thoughtful approach to doing research in order to ensure trustworthy results and conclusions, and that researchers receive fair credit. © 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison L Antes
- Department of Medicine, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Leonard B Maggi
- Department of Medicine, Division of Molecular Oncology, Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Antes AL, Maggi LB. How to Navigate Trainee-Mentor Relationships and Interpersonal Dynamics in the Lab. Curr Protoc 2021; 1:e86. [PMID: 33751862 PMCID: PMC8277482 DOI: 10.1002/cpz1.86] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
Relationships with mentors and labmates are defining aspects of a researcher's journey in science. Ideally, these interactions are outstanding opportunities to learn from others and provide the basis for lifelong collaborations. Unfortunately, sometimes interpersonal dynamics in the lab are challenging. Graduate students entering the lab can greatly benefit from advice about navigating the interpersonal aspects of doing science. This article covers essential recommendations for developing a good trainee-mentor relationship and working well with peers in the lab, or being a "good lab citizen." Lab members-especially graduate students-often spend more time with labmates than with their friends and family during their graduate career, making these relationships essential to their well-being. The guidance also covers some advice for handling a tense relationship or problematic work environment. Finally, the advice concludes by discussing how to manage the fear of failure, overcome imposter syndrome, develop self-awareness, and cope with stress. These four issues are fundamental to success in research but are not discussed with graduate students as much as may be necessary. © 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison L. Antes
- Department of Medicine, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| | - Leonard B. Maggi
- Department of Medicine, Division of Molecular Oncology, Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Barak M, Green G. Applying a Social Constructivist Approach to an Online Course on Ethics of Research. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS 2021; 27:8. [PMID: 33538906 DOI: 10.1007/s11948-021-00280-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/23/2020] [Accepted: 01/04/2021] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
The growing trend of shifting from classroom to distance learning in ethics education programs raises the need to examine ways for adapting best instructional practices to online modes. To address this need, the current study was set to apply a social constructivist approach to an online course in research ethics and to examine its effect on the learning outcomes of science and engineering graduate students. The study applied a pre-test post-test quasi-experimental research design within a framework of a mixed-methods approach. The study compared the learning outcomes of students who participated in a social constructivist online course (N = 175) with those who studied in a conventional online course (N = 170). The data were collected via questionnaires and interviews. The findings indicated that both the conventional and the social constructivist online learners gained knowledge of facts and regulations. Yet, the social constructivist learners were more successful in demonstrating knowledge of practices that are used to establish research ethics, and in understanding the importance of conducting research in a responsible manner. The social constructivist online learners were also more successful in demonstrating awareness of ethical dilemmas, by identifying ethical dilemmas and providing solutions to ethical problems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miri Barak
- The Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, 320003, Haifa, Israel.
| | - Gizell Green
- The Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, 320003, Haifa, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
McIntosh T, Sanders C, Antes AL. Leading the people and leading the work: Practical considerations for ethical research. TRANSLATIONAL ISSUES IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE 2020; 6:257-270. [PMID: 34660847 PMCID: PMC8519508 DOI: 10.1037/tps0000260] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/08/2022]
Abstract
Scientific work is demanding and complex, requiring those leading research to be simultaneously innovative and ethical in their work. Along with this, those leading scientific teams need to be able to influence both the work being done and lab members doing the work. Thus, both leadership and management skills are necessary to navigating the organizational, social, and ethical components of the research process in order to do rigorous, ethical, and high-quality scientific work. This paper recommends a number of practices that leaders of research teams should engage in, including management behaviors for "leading the work" and leadership behaviors for "leading the people" that foster excellence and integrity in research labs. Researchers can take an intentional approach to leadership and management to create a robust environment for ethical research. Overall, a researcher's routine behaviors as leaders of their labs should establish a healthy work environment and promote effective interpersonal interactions among lab members. Further, the lab requires routine procedures and structure to provide adequate oversight of the research. This paper also addresses challenges that may arise when implementing leadership and management practices, along with strategies for overcoming these strategies. Avenues for future research and policy development related to leadership and management in scientific contexts are discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tristan McIntosh
- Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
| | - Chanda Sanders
- University of Oklahoma, Department of Psychology, Norman, OK
| | - Alison L. Antes
- Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Kumari S, Bahinipati J, Pradhan T, Sahoo DP. Comparison of test performance of biochemical parameters in semiautomatic method and fully automatic analyzer method. J Family Med Prim Care 2020; 9:3994-4000. [PMID: 33110800 PMCID: PMC7586617 DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_94_20] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2020] [Revised: 03/12/2020] [Accepted: 04/10/2020] [Indexed: 12/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Background The primary health-care center (PHC) and community health center (CHC) are not well equipped with laboratory services. Semiauto analyzer-based reporting could be an effective modality, provided that the performance standard is comparable to that of the fully automatic analyzer. So, the objective of this study was to analyze the test results of biochemical parameters in semiauto and fully automatic analyzer and to compare the quality performance. Materials and Methods One hundred forty-nine patients undergoing routine biochemical investigations in the department laboratory were enrolled in this study. Two millimeter of venous blood was collected from all the participants and processed for urea, cholesterol, triglyceride (TG), serum glutamate-oxaloacetate transaminase (SGOT) (aspartate aminotransferase), and serum glutamate-pyruvate transaminase (SGPT) (alanine aminotransferase) by using standard kits (ERBA) in semiauto analyzer (Transasia Erba Chem5X by Calbiotech Inc. USA, semiautomated clinical chemistry analyzer) and the fully automatic analyzer (Cobas Integra 400 Roche, Germany) method. Results There was high variability in the distribution of urea, TG, SGOT, and SGPT values in both measurement methods, whereas cholesterol data followed a normal distribution (skewness: 1.522, 1.037; kurtosis: 2.373, 0.693 in semiauto and automated methods, respectively). A significant positive correlation between both the methods of assessment was observed in urea, cholesterol, TGs, SGOT, and SGPT. The mean difference for urea was -9.85 ± 23.997 (LOA: 37.189, -56.88), whereas it was highest for TG -24.34 ± 38.513 (LOA: 51.144, -99.829), suggesting that both methods can measure urea with less difference in absolute values, whereas for TG the measurement values are highly variable. Conclusion The test performance of biochemical parameters such as urea, total cholesterol, TGs, SGOT, and SGPT taken by semiauto analyzer and fully automatic analyzer method of assessment were highly related and comparable.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Suchitra Kumari
- Department of Biochemistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
| | - Jyotirmayee Bahinipati
- Department of Biochemistry, Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences (KIMS), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
| | - Tapaswini Pradhan
- Department of Biochemistry, Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences (KIMS), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
| | - Durgesh P Sahoo
- Department of CMFM, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Barak M, Green G. Novice Researchers' Views About Online Ethics Education and the Instructional Design Components that May Foster Ethical Practice. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS 2020; 26:1403-1421. [PMID: 31872364 DOI: 10.1007/s11948-019-00169-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2019] [Accepted: 11/26/2019] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
The goal of the current study was to examine novice researchers' views about online ethics education and to identify the instructional design components that may foster ethical practice. Applying the mixed methods approach, data were collected via a survey and semi-structured interviews among M.Sc. and Ph.D. students in science and engineering. The findings point to the need for rethinking the way conventional online ethics courses are developed and delivered; encouraging students to build confidence in learning from distance, engaging them in online active and interactive experiences, and providing them with personalized support and adaptive guidance. The novice researchers identified the synergistic integration of collaborative, case-based, and contextual learning, as the instructional design components that may foster not only ethical knowledge but also ethical practice in a fully online course.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Miri Barak
- The Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, 320003, Haifa, Israel.
| | - Gizell Green
- The Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, 320003, Haifa, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Antes AL, Kuykendall A, DuBois JM. Leading for research excellence and integrity: A qualitative investigation of the relationship-building practices of exemplary principal investigators. Account Res 2019; 26:198-226. [PMID: 31033345 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2019.1611429] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/26/2022]
Abstract
We conducted semi-structured, telephone interviews with 52 federally funded researchers nominated as exemplars for their integrity and professional conduct, and their scientific achievements. The aim was to identify the practices they report utilizing to build respectful relationships in their teams. We found four practices, holding meetings, providing supervision and guidance, encouraging shared ownership, and expressing values, which were also important to performing high-quality, compliant research, were essential to fostering relationships. The most common practice described for building relationships was actively and deliberately cultivating a positive team environment. Additionally, exemplars described the need to lead by example, tailor their approach to the needs of individuals, address interpersonal conflict, and hire team members cautiously. We also identified practices the exemplars reported as important to managing the demands of their work and found that encouraging shared ownership and tailoring to individuals supported this goal. Additional strategies related to prioritization and planning, seeking advice, engaging in self-care, and managing emotional reactions. Finally, we identified priorities guiding the exemplars' practices. Key priorities included providing outstanding mentoring, building collaborations and relationships, and engaging in discovery and innovation. Investigators require exceptional leadership skills but receive limited systematic leadership training. Addressing this gap would advance research excellence and integrity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison L Antes
- a Division of General Medical Sciences , Washington University School of Medicine , St. Louis , MO , USA
| | - Ashley Kuykendall
- a Division of General Medical Sciences , Washington University School of Medicine , St. Louis , MO , USA
| | - James M DuBois
- a Division of General Medical Sciences , Washington University School of Medicine , St. Louis , MO , USA
| |
Collapse
|