Ethics and the Welfare of the Physics Profession

Kate Kirby, Frances Houle, Joe Hamilton, Peter Meyers, Rocky Kolb

APS Task Force on Ethics

An awakening

2002Perspective of physics community: the rigor of physics minimizes misconduct 2 data

fabrication events reported

APS issues ethics statements mainly addressing publications: www.aps.org/statements

Ethics task force charged with assessing the state of ethics education in physics and APS ethics-related programs, and recommending new actions

Scope

• Definition of ethics• The APS Task Force on Ethics• Concerns of the physics community• Lessons learned from investigations into

data falsification events• APS actions in 2004 and beyond

What does “Professional Ethics” mean ?

• Federal (legal) definition of misconduct centers on reporting of research results: Fabrication, Falsification, Plagiarism

• Task force’s definition :– Truthful, careful handling and reporting of data– Responsible, respectful interactions with colleagues

and subordinates– Adherence to APS publication guidelines, including

proper recognition of research contributions

What is not a violation of professional ethics

• Honest error in recording or analysis of data, provided errata and retractions are made promptly

• Honest differences of opinion• Personality clashes

Ethics issues outside of the scope of this talk

• Ethical application of the results of physics research

• Consideration of environmental impacts of research in physics

• Conflicts of interest • Use of scarce research resources

Sources of information

Surveys, interviews,

Web research:

APS Units

POPA Ethics chair

Physical Review

Related SocietiesSurveys:

Physics dept chairs

SPS

Junior members

Surveys:

Selected corporations

Large collaborations

The Task Force probed ethics education ethics awareness occurrences of ethics violations other ethics concerns suggestions for effective ethics training

APS Ethics activities prior to 2003

• Units focus on technical programs only

• Panel on Public Affairs (POPA) Ethics subcommittee writes statements in response to events

• Council approves statements on what is ethical and what is not

• Physical Review editors investigate publication issues (mainly plagiarism and authorship)

Surveys, interviews,

Web research:

APS Units

POPA Ethics chair

Physical Review

Related Societies

Surveys:

Physics dept chairs

SPS

Junior members

Academic Sector

Where do young physicists learn about ethics?

0 20 40 60 80 100

courses - formal

tutorial

courses -discussion

discussions withfaculty or students

research groupmeetings (if

member)

0 20 40 60 80 100

undergrad courseformal

undergrad coursediscussion

grad course formal

grad course discussion

research groupmeetings

discussions withstudents or colleagues

tutorial

Undergraduates Junior members

Ethics education in physics is largely informal “the silence that exists now”

Keeping a lab notebook: Do young physicists learn how to record and

analyze data?

0 20 40 60 80 100

creation of a researchrecord

acceptable practices formeasuring, reporting and

interpreting data

Junior members(all settings)

0 20 40 60 80 100

Accurate records

Data retention

acceptable ways toanalyze data

acceptable ways tointerpret data

literature searches

0 20 40 60 80 100

Accurate records in labcourses

Acceptable practices formeasuring and reporting

data

Undergraduates

In research groups

(if they participated in one)

In lab courses

The laboratory notebook

“It’s the freakin’ electronic age, dudes! “Formal training in keeping a laboratory notebook” is so 19th century. With little exception my data were acquired electronically, analyzed by computer (with pertinent results printed out) and are stored electronically. Of course in future decades the data will be unreadable, but as there are millions of bits of data no one could possibly read them anyway.”

an APS Junior member

What is a research record today ?

– What constitutes original data? What is the best way to conserve original data in electronic form?

– What sorts of records should be kept of a research project? What if the project involves multiple groups and multiple institutions?

– What is the best type of research record when most of it is in electronic form? How can the record be preserved for the future when electronic formats are constantly changing?

– Does teaching undergrads how to do labs and report the results help them create a record in today’s research settings?

How ethics-related topics are addressed in physics departments

0 20 40 60 80 100

curriculum

Lab courses

Dept seminars

SPS seminars

Chair-facultyconsultations

Student-facultyconsultations

10% of department chairs reported having knowledge of ethical violations

80% of chairs said the 2002 events did not lead to increased emphasis on ethics

Jr. Members Responses to Open-ended Questions

• 36% (267 respondees) wrote about what they felt were the most serious professional Ethics issues

• 30% (227 respondees) wrote about what Ethics training or educational activities would be valuable: “Anything is better than the silence that exists now”

Ethics concerns of Junior Members of APS

• Mistreatment by research supervisors– “abuse of grad students”– “exploitation”; viewed as cheap labor,

not as students– Lack of credit for work done (inclusion

as co-authors)– 8% reported pressure to do unethical

things

Ethics concerns (Jr. ) cont’d

• 62% of Jr. members thought APS guidelines on ethics should include treatment of subordinates

• 39% have PERSONAL knowledge of ethics violations during their time as a graduate student

39% of Junior Members have observed ethics violations

data falsification

not including authors

plagiarism

less than truthful reports

not citing prior work

delaying referee reports

putting nonauthors on papers

other

Career Pressures

• Pressure to publish a high volume of papers quickly in “elite” journals (Science, Nature, PRL) contributes to:– “less than careful treatment of scientific data”– “lack of careful referencing of previous work”– “desire to cut corners”– Unfair refereeing practices

Recommendations of the APS Ethics Task Force

Follow-up actions in 2004

1. APS guidelines and statements

• Recommendations:– Expand ethics statements to include topics other than publication: Treatment

of subordinates, social responsibilities, intellectual property– Amend current APS guidelines to address additional issues in publication

• Actions:– New statement approved in 2004 on ethical treatment of subordinates– Addendum to guidelines approved covering proper referencing

2. Education• Recommendations:

– Sponsor ongoing discussions of ethics– Develop long-term and short-term ethics education programs– Work to help department chairs and group leaders proactively address

ethics issues – Collect database of model programs and materials

• Actions:– Ethics education is important new focus for APS: task force on ethics

education to be appointed– To be addressed:

• Best way for educational institutions to promote awareness of ethical standards• Who should receive training and when• Development of resources and materials• Promotion of educational events at APS meetings and articles in APS

publications

3. Recommended practices for data documentation and retention

• Recommendations:– Protection of the research record in the electronic age – Awareness of legal requirements

• Actions:– Proposal for NRC study made in the National Academies– Sources of funding to be identified

4. International ethics standards • Recommendations:

– Work with responsible organizations (eg IUPAP, other international scientific unions) to develop common standards

– Include all areas of physics activity

• Actions:– Focus is on working toward common ethics standards and practices in all

countries– International association of physics editors currently working on

• Investigation protocols• Responsibilities of authors’ institutions• Alerts to plagiarism• Legal differences between nations• Frequent meetings to exchange information

– Some societies creating task forces like the APS’

5. Ethics committee

• Recommendation:– Consider whether to have formal standing committee on ethics

• Actions:– Possible committee discussed– Proceed with focused task force for education and reconsider later

Open issues raised by surveys and misconduct reports

What are the responsibilities of coauthors?

How do we deal with the pressures to do sensational work?

What are the responsibilities of co-authors?

• Discussed in Report of the Schoen Investigation Committee, Report of the Ninov Investigation Committee

• Relationships based on trust but also “the first line of defense against misconduct”: how to strike a balance?

• “Researchers unable or unwilling to accept responsibility for a paper should not be co-authors”

Responsibilities of co-authors (cont’d.)

• Joint responsibility for a work: “shared credit must be matched with shared responsibility”– Maintain a complete research record– Check each others’ results– Complete and careful verification of every manuscript

that carries one’s name– Circulation of manuscript to all authors prior to

submission for publication– Issue corrections if needed

What earns the status of coauthor?

Generation and analysis of data Supplying critical materials Analysis of data taken by others Construction of apparatus or writing computer codes used in work

? Interpretation of data taken and analyzed by others ? Securing funding for the project? Membership in long-term team with multiple related projects? Loan of equipment or codes? Consultations and discussions about project? Original idea for project with little participation in execution

× Honorary coauthorship × Authors’ management or Director of institute

• The perpetrator thinks she/he knows the answer and is just having a little problem with the data

• Experiments are poorly reproducible anyway so who’s to know?

• Career pressureD. Goodstein, Physics World, 11/2002

Seeds of professional misconduct

Junior members voiced loud concerns over a system

that rewards visibility over quality and provides incentives to cheat

Harris Poll, October 1, 2003: Scientists top list of “most prestigious occupations”*

Prestige: “Strongly associated with respect…widely seen to do great work which benefits society and the people they serve.”

*survey of all US adults

Thanks to

• The many APS members who answered our surveys• Roman Czujko, AIP Statistics department• Judy Franz, APS Executive Director• Martin Blume, Editor in Chief, Physical Review• Myriam Sarachik, APS President, 2003• Helen Quinn, APS President, 2004• Arthur Bienenstock and James Tsang, APS POPA chairs• Ken Cole and Amy Halsted, APS staff