Establishing an ethical climate in support of research integrity: Efforts and activities of the American Sociological Association

Iutcovich, Joyce Miller; Kennedy, John M.; Levine, Felice J.

doi:10.1007/s11948-003-0007-z

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding is also consistent with more recent prescriptive RCR literature in the field of academic medicine (Schreier, Wilson & Resnik, 2006), which has recommended the need for attention to RCR best practices (e.g., for record-keeping) at both the departmental/school level and the institutional/university level. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that there may be other important factors either internal or external to an institution that could influence the climate for research integrity and RCR (i.e., see Iutcovich, Kennedy & Levine, 2003). This version of the OCRI survey was designed to capture salient aspects of climate at both the departmental and institutional levels, following conceptually-based work presented in the IOM (2002) report.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Content Validation of the Organizational Climate for Research Integrity (OCRI) Survey

Thrush

Putten

Rapp

et al. 2007

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

THE PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY WAS TO develop and establish content validity of an instrument designed to measure the organizational climate for research integrity in academic health centers. Twenty-seven research integrity scholars and administrators evaluated 64 survey items for relevance and clarity, as well as overall comprehensiveness of the constructs that are measured (organizational inputs, structures, processes and outcomes). Both quantitative and qualitative methods were used, particularly content validity indices (CVI) and analyses of respondents' comments. The content validity index for the overall survey was initially high (CVI = .83) and improved (CVI = .90) when 17 marginal-to-poor items were removed. This study resulted in the Organizational Climate for Research Integrity (OCRI) survey, a 43-item fixed-response survey with established content validity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Content Validation of the Organizational Climate for Research Integrity (OCRI) Survey

Thrush

Putten

Rapp

et al. 2007

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, the IRB guidebook (Office of Human Research Protections 1993) states that "if a study is so methodologically flawed that little or no reliable information will result, it is unethical to put subjects at risk or even to inconvenience them through participation in such a study." Professional societies such as the ASA are making progress in this realm (Iutcovich, Kennedy, and Levine 2003). Links are also being recognized by a few social science IRBs that not only protect human subjects but also assess research design and offer "friendly suggestions" for improving it.…”

Section: Recognizing Interconnections Between Methods and Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The American Sociological Association (ASA) has revised its code of ethics to include issues such as supervisory responsibilities, conflicts of interest, data sharing, and reporting research findings. Also, at its annual meetings, the ASA has instituted professional workshops, which provide opportunities for interaction and discussion on a wide range of ethical issues in research (Iutcovich, Kennedy, and Levine 2003).…”

Section: Encouraging a Broader Conception Of Research Ethicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overseeing Research Practice

Leahey

2008

Science, Technology, & Human Values

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines whether and how a particular research practice is overseen and supervised, and by whom. This investigation fills notable gaps in the literature on science, including a lack of emphasis on larger sociopolitical structures, a neglect of regulation, and indifference toward ethics. The author focuses on the oversight of a particular research practice; data editing; which embodies qualities that are intriguing to sociologists of science: invisibility, uncertainty, heterogeneity, and reliance on tacit knowledge. These characteristics pose unique challenges to oversight efforts. An analysis of in-depth interviews with gatekeepers reveals that although the methodological and ethical implications of data editing strategies can be substantial, oversight of such practices falls outside the stages and domains of current gatekeeping activity. These findings serve as the basis for recommendations to ensure data integrity while maintaining the professional autonomy of researchers.

show abstract

“…Since the first Code of Ethics was adopted by the American Sociological Association (ASA) in 1970, it has undergone two major revisions in 1984 and 1997. This most recent version of the ASA code represented a substantial revision, largely in response to increased concern with ethical misconduct among professional societies and government agencies during the mid-1990s (Iutcovich et al 2003). 10.…”

Section: See For Example the Journal Of Empirical Research On Human R...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond the IRB: An Ethical Toolkit for Long-Term Disaster Research

Browne

2014

International Journal of Mass Emergencies & Disasters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article argues for expanding the ethical frame of concern in disaster research from the early phases of site access to longer-term issues that may arise in the field. Drawing on ethical theory, these arguments are developed in five sections. First, we identify the philosophical roots of ethical principles used in social science research. Second, we discuss how ethical concerns span the entire lifecycle of disaster-related research projects but are not fully addressed in the initial protocols for gaining Institutional Research Board (IRB) approval. Third, we introduce the idea of the philosophically informed “ethical toolkit,” established to help build awareness of moral obligations and to provide ways to navigate ethical confusion to reach sound research decisions. Specifically, we use the work of W. D. Ross to introduce a template of moral considerations that include fidelity, reparation, gratitude, justice, beneficence, self-improvement, and non-maleficence. We suggest that in the absence of a clear framework that researchers can use to think through ethical dilemmas as they arise, Ross’ pluralist approach to ethical problem solving offers flexibility and clarity and, at the same time, leaves space to apply our own understanding of the context in question. Fourth, we draw on six examples from our research studies conducted following Hurricane Katrina. Using these examples, we discuss how, in retrospect, we can apply Ross’ moral considerations to the ethical issues raised including: (1) shifting vulnerability among disaster survivors, (2) the expectations of participants, and (3) concerns about reciprocity in long-term fieldwork. Fifth, we consider how the ethical toolkit we are proposing may improve the quality of research and research relationships.

show abstract

Establishing an ethical climate in support of research integrity: Efforts and activities of the American Sociological Association

Cited by 7 publications

References 2 publications

Content Validation of the Organizational Climate for Research Integrity (OCRI) Survey

Content Validation of the Organizational Climate for Research Integrity (OCRI) Survey

Overseeing Research Practice

Beyond the IRB: An Ethical Toolkit for Long-Term Disaster Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About