Ethics in Science

Abstract

Ethics are a set of moral principles and values a civilized society follows. Doing science with principles of ethics is the bedrock of scientific activity. The society trusts that the results and the projected outcome of any scientific activity is based on an honest and conscientious attempt by the scientific community. However, during the last few decades, there has been an explosion of knowledge and the advent of digital age. We can access the publications of competitors with just a “click”. The evaluation parameters have evolved a lot and are based on impact factors, h-index and citations. There is a general feeling that the scientific community is under a lot of pressure for fulfilling the criteria for upward growth and even retention of the positions held. The noble profession of scientific research and academics has been marred by the temptation to falsify and fabricate data, plagiarism and other unethical practices. Broadly speaking, the breach of ethics involves: plagiarism, falsification of data, redundant (duplicate) publication, drawing far-fetched conclusions without hard data, for early publicity, gift authorship (receiving as well as giving), not giving sufficient attention and consideration to scholars and post-docs as per the norms, self promotion at the cost of team-members, treating colleagues (overall all juniors) in a feudal way and Machiavellianism (cunningness and duplicity in general conduct and push to positions of power and pelf). Misconduct in Indian academics and science is also under a lot of focus. It is important and urgent that science, engineering, and health departments and institutions in our country have in place systems for education and training in pursuit of science with ethics by sound and professional courses in Responsible Conduct of Research. All research and academic institution must have the Office of Ethics for information, guidelines, training and professional oversight of conduct of research with the ethos and ethics of research.

Ethics are a set of moral principles and values a civilized society follows. Such dos and don’ts make the human interactions and overall social life pleasant, smooth and livable. The nursery for learning ethics is parents, teachers, mentors and religious institutions [1]. Albert Camus (French philosopher and Nobel Laureate) rightly said: “A man without ethics is a wild beast loosed upon this world”. Scientific pursuit is built on trust [2, 3]. Scientists trust that the results reported by their predecessors and peers are based on sound protocols and the conclusions drawn are valid in the light of current knowledge [2, 3]. Above all, the society and the tax-payer trust that the results and the projected outcome is based on an honest and conscientious attempt by the scientific community to describe the nature and phenomena accurately, without bias, and any hyperbole [2, 3]. A justified difference of opinion has been a part and parcel of scientific activity over the centuries [4]. Richard Willstätter vehemently opposed and ridiculed the contention and sound evidence of James Sumner that enzymes are proteins [4, 5].

The scientific activity has been competitive all along [6]. However, during the last few decades, there has been an explosion of knowledge and the advent of digital age. We can access any information including the publications of competitors with just a “click”. The evaluation parameters have evolved a lot and are based on impact factors, h-index and citations [7, 8]. Overall, it looks like a rat-race and there is a sense of publish or perish [9, 10]. There is a cut throat competition for publishing in journals with maximum visibility and winning grants [11, 12]. There is a general feeling that the scientific community is under a lot of pressure for fulfilling the norms and criteria for upward growth and even retention of the positions held [13, 14]. In the backdrop of this scenario, the noble profession of scientific research and academics has been marred by the temptation to falsify and fabricate data, plagiarism and even sabotage [14, 15]. The examples listed in Table 1 are just representative of the malaise into which the scientific activity is sliding.

Table 1.

Some reports of breach of ethics in research and retractions

Title	Reference	Comments on publication (s) as reported in the reference cited
Misconduct finding at Bell Labs shakes physics community	Nature (2002) 419:419–421	The enquiry committee found that the author used many different techniques to fabricate and falsify data for his publications
Editorial retraction	Science (2006) 311:335	Science editorial statement concerning retraction of 2004 and 2005 stem cell publications by Woo Suk Hwang and coworkers
Fraud rocks protein community	Nature (2009) 462:970	University finds that researcher falsified data supporting 11 protein structures
Scientific integrity—a dark tale behind two retractions	Science (2009) 326:1610–1611; Nature (2009) 462:969	Extortion attempt involved retracted papers
Sabotage	Nature (2010) 467: 516	Postdoc destroyed a colleague’s experiments to get ahead
Retraction: Stimulus-triggered fate conversion of somatic cells into pluripotency	Nature (2014) 505:641–647	High-profile reports claiming an easy way to create pluripotent cells were flawed, Nature announces
STAP retracted	Nature (2014) 511:5–6	Two retractions highlight long-standing issues of trust and sloppiness that must be addressed

See: www.retractionwatch.com, for the regular updates on ethics issues

Research Ethics Timeline (1932–Present): http://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/timeline/.

The larger issue of ethics in science goes much beyond falsification, fabrication of data and plagiarism and has relevance for each stage of scientific activity [1–3].

The steps in doing science are:

• Conceiving an idea.

• Planning an experiment.

• Bench Work (usually more than one worker).

• Discussion and intellectual inputs (extent of contribution).

• Submission of work to conferences.

• Credit in written or oral form.

• Submission of research paper or patent.

The publication of “Office of Research Integrity (ORI) of the Department of Health and Human Services of the USA” and “Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)” give full description of the dos and don’ts on the issues listed above for any research and academic institution [3, 16]. The bench work should be with established and internationally acceptable protocols and safety standards, and data records should be meticulous. In publications, conferences, seminars and interaction with media the claims should be confined to hard data, no soap bubbles for early publicity. Publications of research data is the most solemn part of a research activity. Authorship should go to only those who contributed by way of bench work and/or intellectually. Giving authorship for patronizing or considerations other than science (gift or honorary authorship) is unethical [17, 18]. Similarly, expecting authorship by virtue of being a senior scientist/head without contribution in any form, most importantly intellectual is highly unethical. The accepted norm for the order of authorship is the bench worker who performs the experiments and makes maximum contribution has the claim as first author. In big groups more than one researcher contribute to the completion of the story. In that case, authors contributing equally are listed alphabetically and the publication specifies equal contribution. Mentors and principal investigators have a claim for the first authorship in reviews or book chapters where the work done by the group is reported.

Mentoring is an integral part of scientific activity for raising the next generation of scientists, teachers, and innovators [18–20]. The ethics encompass the whole hog of day to day interactions of senior faculty, juniors, scholars, students and the support staff in research and academics.

Broadly speaking, the breach of ethics involves:

• Plagiarism.

• Falsification of data.

• Redundant (duplicate) publication.

• Drawing far-fetched conclusions without hard data, for early publicity.

• Gift authorship (receiving as well as giving).

• Not giving sufficient attention and consideration to scholars and post-docs as per the norms.

• Self promotion at the cost of team-members.

• Treating colleagues (overall all juniors) in a feudal way.

• Machiavellianism (Cunningness and duplicity in general conduct and push to positions of power and pelf).

The issue of ethics in science has been in intense focus [21]. Overall opinion is the unethical practices in doing and reporting science are much larger than what get exposed through whistle blowers or vigilant readers and competitors [22]. Scientific activity being the bedrock of human development, there has been an intense effort and debate globally to do and publish scientific research with ethics and established norms so that data reported are sound and suitable for use for translational research and follow up [23–27]. The “Responsible and ethical Conduct of Research (RCR)” is of pivotal importance for excellence in science as well as public trust in outcome of scientific activity and utilization of public funds. National Science Foundation (NSF) of the USA provides “sources for RCR for implementation of Section 7009 of the America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science (COMPETES) Act” [28]. NSF requires RCR training for all researchers who conduct research supported by NSF funds [28].

Science and innovation are the drivers of economy of a nation [29]. Plagiarism and misconduct in Indian academics and science is also under a lot of focus [30–33]. However, whatever, comes to light represents a small part of the overall issue of breach of scientific ethics in different forms and the malaise is on the rise [34]. There have been some suggestions to put in place mechanisms to check the menace and have corrective measures [35]. However, it seems that the status quo continues. It is important and urgent that science, engineering, and health departments and institutions in our country have:

• Plagiarism check software like “Turnitin” [36] in all institutions engaged in academics and research. Any academic and research assignment and manuscript must be vetted by such software for acceptability and submission.

• Systems like Office of Research Integrity [3] for education and training in pursuit of science with ethics by sound and professional courses in RCR [28].

• All research and academic institution must have the Office of Ethics for information, guidelines, training and professional oversight of conduct of research with the ethos and ethics of research [37].