Psychological and Social Sciences...Psychological and Social Sciences ... respectfully address and resolve ideas, help translate when there are differences in concepts, methodologies,

Appendix F. Psychology and Social Sciences Modules

Psychological and Social Sciences

Introduction Welcome to the Psychological and Social Sciences portion of the Research Integrity in International

Collaborative Contexts course. Please read this brief background as to the importance of this topic

before exploring the four areas of content.

Collaborative Research

Conflicts of Interest

Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship

Data Management: Access, Sharing, and Exchange

Additional Resources

1


Introduction to the Psychological and Social Sciences Module

Introduction There is renewed interest in the social sciences concerning ethical research, especially in the area of

international research collaborations. With advances in Internet-based research applications, social

media, and sophisticated data collection methods, the opportunities for international collaboration are

increasing accessible. Recent reports confirm that international collaboration in psychology has

increased in the last three decades (Kliegl & Bates, 2011). However, this trend introduces a variety of

ethical issues.

In 2011, a prominent Dutch social psychologist gained international attention when it was discovered

that he engaged in fraudulent research that not only spanned a decade of work, but affected dozens of

graduate students and international collaborators, and led to a great deal of negative commentary

about the state of research in psychology. Although this might be perceived as an extreme case of

fraud, empirical studies suggest that academic misconduct, or questionable research practices, in

psychology (John, Loewenstein, & Prelec, 2012; Simmons, Nelson, & Simonshon, 2012) and other fields

are unfortunately very high (Fang, Steen, & Casadevall, 2012; Rhoades & Eisenberger, 2002) and

observed at varying degrees in developed and developing nations (Ana, Koehlmoos, Smith, & Yan, 2013).

Subsequent public and professional questioning of the methods, ethics, and importance of psychological

research has increased the need for proper and thorough training in research integrity.

The publicity surrounding this case prompted communications between national leadership for more

transparent, team-oriented, and interdisciplinary research partnerships. Innovative changes in how

research is conducted and disseminated are now prominently featured among the field's top

professional organizations, including the Association for Psychological Science's new guidelines for open

and replicable research (Association for Psychological Science, 2013). The Association for Psychological

Science (APS) implemented a new publication model in their flagship journal, Psychological Science, that

encourages scientists to publically post research study proposals with hypotheses, invitations for

independent replication by other labs, and public access to data and programming code. According to

APS, this new model provides numerous benefits that will ultimately reduce the reasons for and

instances of misconduct, including the ability to publish regardless of the outcome, more transparency

about methodology and sharing intellectual resources, and engaging multiple labs, which would

encourage international collaboration. These changes would also assist researchers involved with

psychological research to move toward best practices of reporting statistical conclusions that avert the

shortcomings of traditional null-hypothesis significance testing and overreliance on p values (e.g., effect

sizes).

2


The Importance of Case Studies Violations to academic research integrity are easily condemned after the fact, yet the people are often

operating without enough information, making assumptions about their own and others' behaviors, and

are guided by motives of self-protection and self-enhancement, leading to serious errors in their

research .

To provide real-life examples of violations of academic integrity in psychological research, the modules

include a few well-known and recent cases. The modules highlight the level of academic integrity that

is violated and how it was discovered, consequences of this behavior for psychological and social

sciences more generally, and suggestions to remedy future cases. By reading about real-world cases,

you will see the complexity of collaborative international research, and how cultural and social

differences may increase the already complex research relationship.

3


Collaborative Research

Goals of the Collaborative Research Content/Sub-Module After reviewing the information in this section, you should be able to:

• Contrast the new emphases of "team science" and "translational science"

• Contrast the skills needed in these approaches with the more traditional individualistic models

of research

• Understand the Informed Consent and Participant Privacy and Confidentiality forms/guidelines

and the skills needed for successful implementation of these guidelines when engaging in

international collaboration

• Understand the recommended guidelines for psychologists working internationally and where

to find international ethical codes

At the end of the module, you will review a case study and complete an exercise to demonstrate your

understanding of this material.

Collaborative Research in the Social Sciences Research often requires working collaboratively across different cultures, languages, and theoretical

frameworks in an international setting. Collaborative research is becoming increasingly more common

in social sciences. International collaborative research in the social sciences will most likely benefit from

the inclusion of multiple partners especially from the region/location/population being studied to allow

for a more comprehensive understanding of the cultural and local issues that may impact the research

questions as well as the findings.

Team Science An important development in health sciences research, including psychology and many other social

sciences, is the "team science" approach to research. Team science is defined as large-scale, team

based research that addresses complex and multi-faceted problems that require cross-disciplinary

collaboration (Disis & Slattery, 2010). Team science initiatives promote collaborative and cross

disciplinary approaches to answering research questions about particular phenomena. This approach is

highly endorsed by funding agencies, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National

Cancer Institute (NCI), and the National Science Foundation (NSF) (Bennett, Gadlin, & Levine-Finley,

2010). Universities and funding agencies must identify key research areas that are mutually beneficial to

all involved parties and then pursue them using the team science approach.

Cross-disciplinary collaboration requires working with researchers across different disciplines to meet

research goals. There are three levels of cross-disciplinary science (Rosenfield, 1992):

1. Multi-disciplinary

2. Inter-disciplinary

4


3. Trans-Disciplinary

Multi-disciplinary science involves researchers working in parallel or sequentially to address a common

problem, while inter-disciplinary science describes researchers from different disciplines working

jointly, but from discipline-specific perspectives to address a common problem. Trans-disciplinary

science involves researchers from different disciplines working together using a shared conceptual

framework drawn from disciplinary-specific theories, concepts, and approaches to address common

problems.

To be successful with the trans-disciplinary approach in an international setting, researchers must

respectfully address and resolve ideas, help translate when there are differences in concepts,

methodologies, and frameworks, speak candidly and sensitively with members from different cultural

backgrounds, and embrace the importance of different opinions, ideas, and experiences to achieve

important scientific discoveries.

A team science approach is especially relevant in research that is concerned with mental health care

issues, including comparative-effectiveness research, health disparities research, and other

psychologically-related research investigating human well-being and functioning.

Translational Research Team science is often discussed within the context of translational research. Translational research

refers to a set of stages associated with moving research discoveries toward improved human health

(Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research, 2014). There are four stages associated with

translational research which include:

• Stage 1 links basic scientific discovery to clinical insights and yields potential for intervention

• Stage 2 links clinical insights into implications for practice by testing new interventions (i.e.,

treatment of psychological issues) under controlled environments

• Stage 3 explores ways of applying recommendations or guidelines in genera l practice and

provides knowledge about how interventions work in real-world settings

• Stage 4 studies the factors and interventions that influence the health of populations and seeks

to improve global health.

Combining Team and Translat ional Science: The Benefits The intersection between team science and translational science combines engineering and the physical,

natural, and life sciences with social and health sciences. In areas of health and medicine, research

involving multi-disciplinary and cross-cultural teams often increases the rate of success and the speed of

translation of applicable findings from the laboratory to the general public. Developing a skillset that

combines team, translational, and individualized scientific approaches with an understanding of complex

cultural contexts and differences allows researchers to cross cultura l and international boundaries.

5


Research Ethics and Integrity in Psychology Psychologists and social scientists must develop skills and the awareness to navigate research situations

where expectations about data sharing, authorship, and research guidelines and ethics may differ across

countries and cultural settings. Research integrity in collaborative and international settings require

effective oral and written communication to avoid and resolve potential conflicts.

Psychologists engaging in psychological research are required to adhere to several ethical principles and

practices. The ethical practices are outlined by the American Psychological Association (APA) and should

be well understood by all psychology graduate students and faculty. Social scientists in other disciplines

should consult their respective national organizations' ethical codes for guidelines and rules specific to

their discipline. These ethical principles do not change when engaging in cross-cultural and international

research, but the principles should be adhered to in a culturally sensitive manner that addresses social

and cultural differences. Researchers can avoid and resolve ethical dilemmas by understanding their

ethical obligations and the resources available to them. Two important resources for psychologists are:

1. The Belmont Report: Released by the National Commission for the Protection of Human

Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research in 1979, the report provides the ethical

framework and regulations for research involving human participants. This report serves as the

basis for human participant protection legislation.

2. The APA Ethical Code offers general principles and specific guidelines for research in Psychology.

Additional Codes of Ethics and Guidelines • American Psychiatric Association Code of Ethics

• American Medical Association Code of Medical Ethics

• Public Health Leadership Society Principles of the Ethical Pract ice of Public Health

• Declaration of Helsinki (DoH)

• International Federation of Social Workers Statement of Ethical Principles (IFSW)

• World Health Organization Ethics (WHO)

• World Medical Association International Code of Ethics (World Medical Association, 2014)

Confidentiality and Privacy and Informed Consent are both important aspects of conducting ethical

research.

Confidentiality and Privacy All researchers must adhere to the participants' rights to confidentiality and privacy. Privacy protection

differ according to the research population under study (American Psychological Association, 2000). In

cross-cultural collaborations, researchers must discuss participant confidentiality and privacy with

cultural sensitivity while addressing differing cultural perspectives. Researchers must consider that

what works in one research setting may not be appropriate in another, different research setting. When

working with individuals from different countries or cultures, researchers must understand the cultural

and social context to address privacy and confidentiality. This may require consultation with group

leaders or other researchers familiar with that population and their cu lture.

During cross-cultural research, remember to:

6


1. Discuss the limits of confidentiality: Discuss with collaborators and cultural leaders specific

plans about how participant data will be gathered and used (e.g., interviews, case studies,

photos, whether audio and video equipment will be used, etc.) and provide this information to

the participants.

2. Know the law: Familiarize yourself with any state, federal, national, regional, and international

laws from all participating countries that apply to your research and data collection. In the

United States, The Education Act of 1994 prohibits asking children about religion, sex or family

life without parental permission (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2009). While most states

in the USA only require licensed psychologists to comply with mandatory reporting laws, some

laws also require researchers to report abuse and neglect. Researchers must plan for situations

in which they may learn of such reportable offenses and how they must be reported. Generally,

research psychologists can consult with a clinician or their institution's legal department to

decide the best course of action. Be sure to consider the cross-cultural implications of these

strategies (see Leach & Oakland, 2010, for a cross-cultural perspective).

3. Take practical security measures: Regardless of where the data is collected, always ensure

confidential records are stored in a secure area with limited access and consider removing any

identifying information. Be aware of situations where confidentiality could inadvertently be

breached, such as having confidential conversations in an non-soundproof room or including

participants' names on bills paid by accounting departments. Consider carefully how different

practices at different institutions or countries could impact these security measures.

4. Think about data sharing before the research begins: If data will be shared among different

researchers in different countries or institutions, this information should be included in the

participant consent process. In some cases, participants may need to grant permission fortheir

data to be shared with researchers working in other countries or for other national or

international institutions or agencies. Researchers should use established guidelines and

techniques to protect confidentiality, including coding data to hide identities, when sharing

data.

5. Understand the limits of the Internet: Conducting research on line is appealing because it offers

the chance to collect data from around the world. Researchers should discuss issues of

confidentiality with their research collaborators when collecting, storing, and sharing data

across the World Wide Web. Different countries may have different requirements of

researchers collecting data via the Internet and rules for exchanging confidential information

electronically.

Informed Consent In cross-cultural research collaborations, data collection may occur in one or more settings. The

Informed Consent process involves three key features : (1) disclosing to potential research subjects

information needed to make an informed decision; (2) facilitating the understanding of what has been

disclosed; and (3) promoting the voluntariness of the decision about whether or not to participate in the

research. Informed consent must be legally effective and prospectively obtained (Health and Human

Services, 2014).

According to the APA, Informed Consent is one of the most important aspects of conducting research,

and yet in cross-cultural collaborations not all researchers have direct oversight or knowledge of how

these procedures are followed (See Human Subject Research and Developing Countries: Beneficence

7


and Protection of Human Rights by Julia Brylinski). One important ethical consideration when engaging

in cross-cultural collaborative research is to familiarize yourself with informed consent practices in your

country and those of your collaborators and then communicate these practices to your collaborators.

The consent process ensures that individuals are voluntarily participating in the research with full

knowledge of the relevant risks and benefits. Federal standards dictate that participants must have

access to all information that might reasonably influence their willingness to participate in a written or

spoken language that they can understand and comprehend. How potential research participants

understand and comprehend the nature of the research project may vary depending on cultural norms

and practices.

By way of review, the APA Ethical Code requires that psychologists who conduct research should inform

participants about:

1. Purpose of the research, expected duration and procedures

2. Participants' rights to decline to participate and to withdraw from the research once it has

started, as well as the anticipated consequences of doing so

3. Reasonably foreseeable factors that may influence their willingness to participate, such as

potential risks, discomfort, or adverse effects

4. Any prospective research benefits

5. Limits of confidentiality, such as data coding, disposal, sharing and archiving, and instances

when confidentiality must be broken

6. Incentives for participation

7. Contact information for any questions or concerns of the participants

8. Discuss the likelihood, magnitude, and duration of harm or benefit of participation, emphasizing

that involvement is voluntary and discussing treatment alternatives, if relevant to the research

9. For studies of experimental treatment research, participants must be informed about the

experimental nature of the treatment, services that will or will not be available to the control

groups, how participants will be assigned to treatments and control groups, available treatment

alternatives, and compensation or monetary costs of participation

10. If research participants or clients are not competent to evaluate the risks and benefits of

participation themselves--for example, minors or people with cognitive disabilities--then the

person who is granting permission must have access to that same information

Informed Consent is not required in only two situations (APA Ethics Code)

1. When permitted by law or federal or institutional regulations, or

2. When the research would not reasonably be expected to distress or harm participants and

involves one of the following:

a. The study of normal educational practices, curricula, or classroom management

methods conducted in educational settings

b. Anonymous questionnaires, naturalistic observations, or archival research for which

disclosure of responses would not place participants at risk of criminal or civil liability or

damage their financial standing, employability or reputation, and for which

confidentiality is protected

8


c. The study of factors related to job or organization effectiveness conducted in

organizational settings for which there is no risk to participants' employability, and

confidentiality is protected

If psychologists are precluded from obtaining full consent at the beginning--for example, if the protocol

includes deception, recording spontaneous behavior, or the use of a confederate--they shou ld offer a

full debriefing after the data collection and provide people with an opportunity to reiterate their

consent.

Psychologists should make reasonable efforts to avoid offering "excessive or inappropriate financial or

other inducements for research part icipation when such inducements are likely to coerce participation"

(American Psychological Association, 2014).

Informed Consent: Issues in cross-cultural research

Challenges may arise when gathering informed consent from participants in countries outside the United States. Since it is important to achieve sampling equivalence, what can researchers do to increase the informed consent from international participants? The cross-cultural psychologist David Matsumoto highlights the problem:

"In the United States, it is impossible to conduct research involving human participants without first

receiving approval from an institutional review board {IRB), and most IRB guidelines require that

researchers obtain consent from the participants before collecting data. These procedures, however, do

not exist in most countries outside the United States. In fact, in most places outside the United States,

not only is submitting a research proposal for review unnecessary but obtaining consent from human

participants is unnecessary, as well. This raises ethical dilemmas for researchers: Do we obtain consent

from participants in cultures in which it is not necessary to obtain consent, or even frowned upon? Will

all participants understand the concept of "consent " in the same way? What does "consent" mean in

different cultures and who is authorized to give and obtain "consent"? Furthermore, if we do obtain

consent from our participants, how do we obtain it? Many participants in many cultures will likely view

consent documents with skepticism or fear. Will they understand such a process and feel comfortable

about giving consent?" (Matsumoto & Jones, 2010, pp. 329-330).

Matsumoto and Jones also provide a few suggestions:

"Regardless of whether obtaining consent is necessary or not, we believe that researchers should always

strive to ensure that (a) informed consent is obtained and understood by the participant, (b) invasion of

privacy is minimized, and (c) consent will be obtained only in a manner that minimizes coercion or

undue influence. How can this process be done in a culturally competent manner? In our experience,

many of the same consent procedures can be used around the world, if delivered in a skillful and

cu lturally competent manner by the research team. This manner involves the truthful and honest

description of the procedures of the study, its risks and benefits, combined with a genuine interest in

the participant and his/her welfare. If written consent is required, forms need to be translated in a

competent and culturally appropriate manner. Involving cu ltural informants as collabo rators or

experimenters can help ensure that researchers are making the most diligent of efforts in this difficult

ethical area of research" {Matsumoto & Jones, 2010, pp. 328).

9


Guidelines for Psychologists Working Internationally Leach & Oakland (2010) argue that a common ethical dilemma exists for psychologists that work in

foreign countries because those countries do not have ethical codes that govern psychologists' work.

These authors provide guidelines to help psychologists working under such conditions. Psychological

ethic codes developed by more than SO different countries are different in their structure, content, and

the degree to which standards are emphasized. These ethical codes also differ with regard to their

enforceability (e.g., "standards" are more likely to be enforced as compared to "guidelines").

The authors also note in their paper that psychologists working outside their home country of the

United States must be mindful of cultural differences, including language, religion, cultural and social

values, prevailing racial/ethnic, economic, and social conditions, professional and gender role

expectations, and the knowledge of the discipline and practices in psychology (Leach and Oakland,

2010).

Suggestions for working in another country include (Leach and Oakland, 2010):

1. Before working in a host country, acquire knowledge about the country. Consult Wikipedia and

travel books for a country description. The U.S. Department of State also provides descriptions

of many countries (U.S. Department of State, n.d.). The Central Intelligence Agency provides

information about countries, including those in which travel and work may be more dangerous

(Central Intelligence Agency, n.d.).

2. With this background information, psychologists can acquire knowledge about the nature of

psychological practices in the host country.

a. The Handbook of International Psychology (Stevens & Wedding, 2004) provides a review

of the status of psychology in 27 countries.

b. International psychology is discussed in International Psychology: Views from Around

the World (Sexton & Hogan, 1992).

c. The Handbook of International School Psychology (Jimerson, Oakland, & Farrell, 2007)

provides an introduction to school psychology in 44 countries.

3. Psychologists should adhere to ethical codes established by national professional associations in

their native country and the host country. Conduct an Internet search using the name of the

professional association in the host country. Download and study the ethical code from the host

country if one exists.

4. Psychologists who learn that psychological practices in the host country are not governed by an

ethical code should still maintain their obligation to act ethically. The relevance oftheir national

professional association's ethical code should be discussed with their collaborators.

5 . Psychologists should review ethical codes from the International Test Commission (International

Test Commission, 2008), the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health

(World Health Organization, 2014), as well as the Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for

Psychologist s (International Union of Psychological Science, 2013) for their relevance. The scope

of the latter document is broader and thus possibly more relevant than the other resources.

6. A country's moral principles and values help form the foundation for the profession's ethical

code, and researchers should elicit information about prevailing moral principles and values

important to the host country and that guide the work of psychologists there . This discussion

10


may include a review of the relevance of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (United

Nations, 2014).

7. Psychologists working in a host country may be asked to provide services that are higher than

those of their hosts and colleagues yet beyond their areas of competence. Psychologists should

respectively decline such requests when the work lies outside their area of expertise and

competence. Those engaged in research are advised to consu lt Byrne, Oakland, Leong, van de

Vijve r, Hambleton, Cheung, & Bartram (2009) for a review of methodological and ethical aspects

important to cross-national research and to determine their level of competence to engage in

such work.

8. Psychologists should adhere to legal codes that govern their personal and professional

behaviors. Summaries of these codes for each country are not available. Thus, psychologists

are encouraged to consult with knowledgeable colleagues on these issues before arriving in the

host country. Remain mindful of the provisions of the Universal Copyright Convention (UNESCO,

2014) and the Berne Convention (World Intellectual Property Organization, n.d.), as well as

other international laws and treaties.

Case Study Dr. Johnson, an associate professor of psychology at Northern Arizona University, has published an

article in which he proposed that perceived mattering to same-sex friends explains the relationship

between friendship quality and happiness. She supported her model in an American sample and wi ll

test the generalizability of her model in a cross-cultural study. Specifically, she will test her model in

Malaysia and Ghana. She learns through e-mail exchanges with her colleagues and collaborators that

there is no I RB-equivalent institutions in these nations and informed consents are not deemed as

necessary. What should Dr. Johnson do and how could she proceed with her study?

Exercise What should you do when working in a host country that does not have an ethica l code? (Refer to the

guidelines in Leach and Oakland, 2010).

11


Conflicts of Interest

Goals After reviewing the information in this section, you should be able to:

• Understand the definition of conflict of interest and the different types

• Understand the importance of conflict of interest and how it might hinder scientific progress

and harm objectivity

• Explain ways to address conflict of interest

At the end of the module, you will review two case studies and complete an exercise to demonstrate

your understanding of this material.

Conflicts of Interest in the Social Sciences Conflicts of interest are of concern in the social sciences. The public and consumers of research have

the right to expect that research findings are not influenced by conflict of interest of the researcher or

the methods used in the study. Social science research is also susceptible to hidden or uncovered

conflicts of interest, including biases, which can further complicate the interpretation of results. It is

necessary to understand how conflicts of interest could impact the research project and the results

reported. This section will discuss the types of conflicts of interests that are endemic to social sciences,

especially in international research, and how they can best be avoided.

Conflict of Interest Imagine the following scenario:

You are the director of the International Student and Scholar Center at a university and are looking for a

training program for your employees to promote their intercultural communication skills. In your search,

you discover a recent paper comparing the short- and long-term effectiveness of three intercultural

sensitivity and communication training programs. The authors reported findings claiming that one

program was more effective than the others. You decided to contact the company and use university

resources to purchase a training program for your employees. You were not very pleased with the

immediate or later intercultural skills displayed by your employees. A few years later, you learned that

the authors of the paper received funding from the owners of the training program and have been

providing consulting services to the training program. You also learned that the authors withheld a few

studies that failed to support their original conclusion regarding the superiority of this program over

others. Would you feel deceived? Would this influence your trust of the field in general? How

confident will you be when choosing a new training program for your employees?

The general issue surrounding the case above is conflict of interest. Scientists are responsible for

maintaining objectivity in their research. However, various types and levels of conflict of interest might

12


decrease objectivity in scientific inquiry. There are serious consequences when conflicts of interest are

not fully disclosed and addressed.

Conflict of Interest: What is it? There are several definitions of conflict of interest. The American Psychological Association (APA)

defines conflict of interest as, " ... when a researcher has to contend with two or more competing

concerns, such as honestly reporting research results versus making a profit, achieving publication or

retaining outside funding" (American Psychological Association, 2014) . Thompson (1993) highlights the

dynamic influence between two types of interest," ... a set of conditions in which professional judgment

concerning a primary interest (such as a patient's welfare or the validity of research) tends to be unduly

influenced by a secondary interest (such as financial gain)."

There are two general types of conflict of interest: financial and nonfinancial (Antonuccio, Danton, & Mcclanahan, 2003; Greenwald, Poehlman, Uhlmann, & Banaji, 2009; Levinsky, 2002). Financial conflicts

of interest include cases in which a researcher serves as a consultant for a company or receives funding

from the industry to conduct research. Nonfinancial conflicts of interest include cases where a

researcher's political, religious, or theoretical beliefs influence publishing or funding decisions. Although

both of types are serious, major funding organizations and other scholarly research focus primarily on

financial conflicts of interest.

All conflicts of interests "are not inherently negative" (American Psychological Association, 2014). It is

acceptable, and at times encouraged, by universities to develop entrepreneurial allegiances with

different types of industry. The Bayh-Dole Act (1980) facilitated this process and also resulted in serious

concerns regarding conflict of interest. There were several attempts to regulate the Bayh-Dole Act

process, including:

• American Psychological Association : Conflict of Interests and Commitments

• National Institutes of Health : Financial Conflict of Interest Policy

• National Institutes of Health: Objectivity in Research

How conflicts of interest are handled is far more important than the conflict itself.

Guidelines Institutions, government agencies, and funding agencies all have guidelines for identifying and disclosing

conflicts of interest. Always review your professional association's and conflict of interest regulations or

guidelines before beginning research . Here are a few examples of guidelines:

Conflict of Interest Guidelines • NIH Conflicts of Interest

• Ethical Guidelines for Managing Conflicts of Interest in Health Services Research

• ABOR Conflict of Interest Policy

• WMA Statement on Conflict of Interest

• GRU Individual Conflict of Interest Policy

13


Is Conflict of Interest Really a Serious Concern? A conflict of interest is a serious concern if it is not properly addressed and mediated. Here are a few

examples that received national and international attention:

• FDA Panels

• The case of Dr. P. Trey Sunderland

• Pfizer accused of testing new drug without ethical approval

• Examples of biased reporting in clinical research

After reading these examples, do you think conflict of interest is a serious concern in social science

research?

Addressing Conflicts of Interest Since conflict of interest is a serious issue that could harm public trust in science and hinder scientific

progress, it is essential to address this issue at various leve ls. Antonuccio et al. (2003) describes the

need to address this problem in psychology and provides an important list of guidelines. Greenwald

(2009) provided va luable suggestions to the scientific community on the importance of different roles of

researchers, editors, and reviewers. In addition to federal guidelines and regulations, many publishers

and journals in different fields require a Declaration of Conflict of Interest Form to be signed by

researchers (Ancker and Flanagin, 2007). For instance, APA journals require authors whose manuscripts

have been accepted for publication to sign a full Disclosure of Interest s document (American

Psychological Association, 2014).

Case Studies

Case Study #1 You are ce lebrating you r publication in a top journal in which you cross-culturally validated the

effectiveness of a lie detection training program with various experiments in the U.S. and in France. A

few months later, you learn that your collaborators in France were approached by the owner of the

training program and received funding to conduct these experiments. You also discover that your

collaborators did not inform you about the null findings they obtained in a few experiments. What do

you do?

Case Study #2 Imagine that you are invited to a review a manuscript submitted for publication in a scientific journal.

Although this is a blind review where the author identity is removed, you realize that it is written by one

of your colleagues. As you read the paper, you have concerns about the study design. The findings

reported in the manuscript might be very helpful, if published, to strengthen the rationale for your grant

proposal. What do you do?

14


Exercise Find "Full Disclosure of Interests" documents from different journals and from different fields and

compare them using the following criteria:

• Is there a definition of conflict of interest?

• Are there any examples?

• Do they address financial and non-financial types of conflicts?

15


Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship


• Define plagiarism and explain how it may be viewed within different research cultures

• Identify potential differences in national or cultural norms regarding authorship

• Understand the underlying causes for authorship misconduct, including fraud or suspected fraud

• Make recommendations for best practices in authorship

• Understand recent trends and new guidelines regarding authorship



Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship in the Social

Sciences Publication practices and assigning authorship in the social sciences can be fraught with problems if they

are not addressed openly and fully at the outset of a collaborative research project. These issues

become increasingly more complex in international contexts where multiple researchers and thus

authors with different cultural and social practices contribute to the research and publication process.

This section will cover topics related to publication practices and responsible authorship in international

contexts and how they can best be addressed when assigning authorship reflective of their

contributions.

Plagiarism Plagiarism is a form of misconduct and well-known to U.S. students and researchers in the social

sciences. Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without

giving appropriate credit (Steneck, 2007).

When engaging in collaborative research with international colleagues, all parties should explain and

discuss that constitutes plagiarism in each country. In a recent review of 2,047 biomedical and life

science research publications through May of 2012, nearly two thirds of all retractions were because of

misconduct, including fraud or suspected fraud (Fang, Steen, & Casadevall, 2012). Plagiarism and

duplicate publication exists in countries that do not have long research histories (e.g., China, India, and

Turkey), and such misconduct is often found in low-impact journals. One reason for these types of

misconduct may come from the pressure to publish in English journals. Please review the plagiarism

case of the Turkish physicists below:

16


• Turkish Physicists Face Accusations of Plagiarism

• Bechhoefer's Response

Ana, Koehlmoos, Smith, and Yan (2013) examined cases where Brazilian researchers regarded copying

text as not very serious and because of the difficulty of writing in English scientific journals. Another

form of misconduct comes in the form of "self-plagiarism," or the covert reuse of already published data

or one's own portion of text that has already been published (Roig 2010).

Please review the NAU Student Handbook and the Academic Integrity Policy for more information on

how NAU defines and deals with plagiarism.

Video Resources • A Primer on Plagiarism

Responsible Authorship and Author Order Common issues of authorship that arise in research publications include determining the order authors'

names and the significance of the different contributions to the publication. These issues are

increasingly complex in team science when there many authors and a division of responsibility exists.

Although there is widespread agreement within the American Psychological Association Ethical Code

that authorship order should be awarded on the basis of intellectual contribution, graduate students in

psychology may have difficulties addressing this topic with research faculty and advisors (Bartle, Fink, & Hayes,2000). The activities considered most worthy of author credit include developing the idea for the

study and writing the paper, followed by designing the study and analyzing the data. Data collection

and entry are viewed as relatively unimportant and more worthy of a footnote.

Osborne & Holland (2009) present an overview of a survey on how authorship and authorship order is

determined in scientific publications. As research becomes more complex and interdisciplinary with

multiple authors and the "team science" approach, specific authorship guidelines and procedures are

necessary. International collaborations add a level of complexity with different cultural norms and

practices surrounding these issues.

Status and power, two important variables in all cultures, can play a large role in determining authorship

and order. Authorship is often given to individuals because of their position or title, although they did

not contribute to the research, while students who did contribute to the research do not receive credit

because of their position. In the U.S., the common practice is not to account for seniority when

establishing authorship, but in some international countries, authorship addresses seniority, with those

in higher positions within agencies and institution receiving first authorship without contributing to the

research or publication. In psychology and other social sciences, first authorship is often seen as more

prestigious, while in other disciplines authorship is listed alphabetically, which can disadvantage

researchers with names at the end of the alphabet, as articles with more than 5 authors are truncated

for publication.

In their review, Osborne & Holland (2009) summarize a "substantial" contribution, which could include

some combination of one or more of the following:

1. Conception or design

17


2. Data collection and processing

3. Analysis and interpretation of the data, and/or

4. Writing substantial sections of the paper

Research Study Contracts To avoid authorship issues, researchers should discuss how contributions to the research and

publication will be address in authorship of the submitted publication prior to starting the

research project. In student-faculty collaborations, the faculty member is responsible for initiating the

authorship conversation, but the student should address the topic if the faculty advisor does not. A

research study contract can clarify roles and responsibilities in research. The research study contract

includes a list of all of the tasks included in a research project, including literature review, hypothesis

generation, research design, Institutional Review Board paperwork and approval, data collection, data

analysis, and writing. Researchers then use a checklist to facilitate a discussion of each task and w ho is

responsible for each task. Other examples of forms used to establish author order and research

responsibilities include:

• Point and Methods Assignment for Activities Associated with Research Manuscript / Poster

• Contract Regarding Publication Intent

Although you may create a research study contract and determine authorship early in the research,

remember there are legitimate reasons why authorship might change throughout the project.

Collaborators have ongoing discussions about the project and the research contract shou ld aspects of

the project change. For example, a student who agreed to be second author may take the lead on a

substantial paper revision and his/her contributions may warrant first-authorship. Alternatively, if a

member of the team drops out, assignments might shift and a new discussion about responsibility and

authorship is necessary.

International Collaboration and Authorship When conducting research with international or interdisciplinary collaborators, it is important to

consider that different cultures and disciplines may have different authorship guide lines. Researchers

should review their professional organizations' recommendations and guidelines regarding responsible

authorship and publication practices. Psychologists should review the American Psychologists

Association's recommendations . When reviewing the guidelines and recommendations, consider how

these practices may be affected by physical distance and cultural differences when collaborating with

international partners.

The following rea l-life example from an American psychologist will help you better understand the

importance of the authorship issue.

The Growing Problem of Plagiarism and a Possible Solution Increasingly, the problem of plagiarism is seen as complex and not merely the result of poor ethics, but

rather because of cultural and training differences in the use of others' intellectual ideas. Furthermore,

18


plagiarism, or at least the Western conceptualizations of plagiarism, is increasing, and researchers and

students from non-Western cultures are often depicted as "perpetrators" of a "crime against the

academic community of enlightened academic scholars" (Leask, 2007). Leask argues that rather than

seeing plagiarism as a war that needs to be won, Westerners should try to understand plagiarism as

culturally-constructed and through recognizing these cultural differences and concepts of plagiarism,

plagiarism can be reduced.

Case Studies Please read the following examples taken from a real-world example and consider how you might

address plagiarism that might be the result of different expectations and standards regarding plagiarism.

Example 1 A research psychologist from a U.S. un iversity was editing a volume of research articles on a particu lar

topic. The editor solicited and received chapters from researchers from around the world . From one set

of authors, the editor received a manuscript that contained many examples of plagiarism.

If you were the editor, what would your response be? What steps would you take and why?

Example 2 Adam Sloan is a graduate student who received a scholarship to travel to a South American country to

conduct a research study examining the association between self-esteem, same-sex friendship, and

academic achievement in elementary school children . Adam operating out of a well-known university's

Psychology Department, a department known to have highly productive researchers. Adam was paired

with a newly hired assistant professor from that university, Juan, w ho was under considerable pressure

to conduct research and publish. Adam and Juan quickly hit it off and decided that they would mutually

benefit from working on a study together. Given Adam's unfamiliarity wit h the language and culture, he

believed there would be many advantages to collaborating with Juan. Juan would be responsible for

finding and working with local school administrators and helping with questionnaire translation while

Adam, as the principal investigator, would be responsible for the study design, materials, and

implementation.

The study was completed, data collected, and Adam returned to the United States to finish writing the

manuscript and submit it for publication. Adam and Juan worked together for another year on the

paper, communicating through email and by phone. They stored different versions of the paper in a

web-based folder that both Adam and Juan had access to. Adam submitted the paper, with himself as

first author and Juan as second author. The paper was eventually published.

About two years later, Adam was asked to review a theoretical paper for another journal on the

importance of self-esteem and same-sex friendships in elementary school children. Adam was

unpleasantly surprised to read the paper for review contained so many of his ideas from his own earlier

work, and several of the paragraphs appeared to be exact copies of the paper he had just published with

Juan. Further, these theoretical paragraphs were about Adam's main research area and reflected

Adam's ideas, yet there was no reference to Adam or his previously published work on the topic. It

appeared that whoever wrote the article was presenting Adam's ideas as his or her own. Adam had

19


even coined the term in his earlier work to describe one of the key sets of relationships that predicted

academic success in students and the unknown author used the term liberally throughout his paper and

in the title of the paper.

Given what you've read and learned in this module, what factors may have led to this situation? In

retrospect, could Adam have done anything to prevent this type of plagiarism from occurring? Are there

any steps that Adam should take as a reviewer?

Exercise In response to a hypothetical research situation, construct a letter clarifying authorship and publication

expectations in a culturally sensitive manner. Describe the steps a researcher would take to insure

responsible authorship order in a situation where there are multiple authors.

20


Data Management: Access, Sharing, and Exchange


• Understand the basics elements of data management and the growing challenges of big data in

data management and archiving

• Describe issues surrounding data ownership and possible solutions

• Recognize how international collaborations factor into data ownership and management



Data M anagement in the Social Sciences In the psychological and social sciences, issues of data management (data acquisition, protection,

archiving, and sharing) are increasingly important. Innovative ways to manage data advance the

reliability, reproducibility, and validity of empirica l research to align research values with academic

scholarship. Examples of scholarly data management include systematic disclosure of methods and

results, pre-analysis plans, and open access data and materia ls.

Large databases containing publicly accessible data are now available and in use by individuals who

played no role in collecting the data. Researchers can post large data sets on line, widely disseminating

the data without the traditional peer-review or quality control procedures used by large, public

databases. This rapid dissemination provides tremendous opportunities for scientific advancement, but

new mechanisms for ensuring data quality remain necessary.

Internationa l differences in data collection and management policies can complicate data management,

particularly in the era of "big data," and the opportunities it presents for synthesis and understanding

across international boundaries. Big data refers to any collection of data sets so large and complex that

it becomes difficult to process using on-hand data management tools or traditional data processing

applications.

Data Management Plan: Collecting, Recording, and

Maintaining Data When collecting and recording data, the researcher is responsible for establishing a data management

plan that protects the research participants and ensures the data wil l not be used in an unauthorized

manner. Researchers should determine how funding sources, employment agreements, and

agreements with collaborators affect the different stages of data management, including ownership,

21


storage, and sharing the data. This includes establishing by whom and how the data will be stored,

preserved, shared, or disposed of in the long term. Researchers should also consider any possible uses

of collected data and materials when obtaining permission and consent from research participants.

Considerations when creating a data management plan (UCONN, 2014):

• Data description o What kind of data will be produced? o Is it live or ready to be archived? o What file formats will be used?

• Metadata o How will you describe the data to make it discoverable? o What documentation is needed to make the data useable? o What metadata standards will you use?

• Access and Reuse o Have you established a timeline for when the data will be available? o Are there confidentiality issues? o Do any regulations apply to the data (for example HIPAA)? o Should the data be restricted or embargoed for intellectual property reasons? o Do you have the right to share the data if it is not produced by you? o Are there any copyrighted materials associated with the data? o Will the data be licensed? o Who will be able to access the data? o Who may be interested in your data in the future and what might it be used for? o Are there any reasons not to allow re-use?

• Archiving and Preservation o How long should your data be kept? o Have you identified a repository or archive in which to deposit your data? o How will the data be prepared for long term preservation (if needed.) o Will funding or other institutional commitments be requ ired for preservation? o What are the procedures for your intended long term data location for preservation and

backup? o How will documentation and cu ration responsibilities be transferred from one entity to

another? • Transition or Termination of the Data Collection

o How long will your data be active? o Who will manage it? o Do you have a retention schedule or a schedule to destroy your data at some point? o Is there a need to migrate or transition your data to another media or structure in the

future? o Will data be destroyed after a specific time period? If so:

• Are there ethical or legal obligations for the secure removal of data after a specific time period?

• How do you plan to destroy the data?

Social science researchers must also inform their participants of the data management plan, including

the collection, use, archival, and possible exchange or sharing of the research records. Open

22


communication concerning the use and possible reuse and exchange of the data contributes to a good

relationship with the research participants.

While developing your data management plan, be sure to discuss plagiarism, fabrication, falsification,

and misrepresentation of the information or its sources with your colleagues. Always ensure the

confidentiality, protection, and security of all notes, recordings, samples, and other primary data during

the collection and maintenance of data. Remember, data and its analysis is subject to interpretation,

and this interpretation may vary between researchers, across disciplines, or in international contexts.

Data is always susceptible to differing and unintended uses.

Additional Resources • Data Management And Sharing FAQs • Create and Manage Data

• Why Create a Data Management Plan? • Writing a Data Management Plan

Video Resources • Ethics and Integrity in Data Use and Management

What is Metadata? How Should You Archiving Your Data? Metadata is data about data. Structural metadata is information about the design and specification of

data structures and is often termed "data about the containers of data." Descriptive metadata is about

individual instances of application data, the content data.

Data should be retained for years after collection and analysis, and all collaborators must agree on the

terms of data management during all stages of the research process. Advances in technology ensure

that the data remains accessible in the future through careful archiving of the data and the

methodological details to collect and analyze the data. Archiving data requires the data itself (primary

data), as well as information about the data (metadata or secondary data), be stored in a format that is

accessible and will not degrade the quality of the data over time. Michener, Brunt, Helly, Kirchner, & Stafford (1997) describe what metadata for an experiment should be included:

1. Data set descriptors (i.e., abstract, key words)

2. Research origin descriptors (i.e., Investigators involved, funding sources, objectives, methods,

experimental design)

3. Data set status and accessibility (i.e., date of last modifications, data use restrictions)

4. Data structure (i.e., file type, description of response variables, data type)

5. Supplemental descriptors (i.e., data forms, quality control procedures, publications)

6. Location(s) of physical specimens.

Large amounts of data now exists in digital form. Software changes dramatically over the years,

sometimes rendering data stored in an older format inaccessible in a newer format. Public data

23


repositories can solve accessibility problems, but researchers must know how to effectively manage and

store data.

Data Sharing The recent increases in our ability to generate large amounts of data in the psychological and social

sciences leads to greater expectations for data dissemination and sharing, particularly for research that

is publicly funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) or other agencies. For example, NSF's data

dissemination and sharing policies, shown below, encourage sharing data.

From the NSF Award and Administration Guide (2013): "Dissemination and Sharing of Research Results"

a. Investigators are expected to promptly prepare and submit for publication, with authorship that

accurately reflects the contributions of those involved, all significant findings from work

conducted under NSF grants. Grantees are expected to permit and encourage such publication

by those actually performing that work, unless a grantee intends to publish or disseminate such

findings itself.

b. Investigators are expected to share with other researchers, at no more than incremental cost

and within a reasonable time, the primary data, samples, physical collections and other

supporting materials created or gathered in the course of work under NSF grants. Grantees are

expected to encourage and facilitate such sharing. Privileged or confidential information should

be released only in a form that protects the privacy of individuals and subjects involved. General

adjustments and, where essential, exceptions to this sharing expectation may be specified by

the funding NSF Program or Division/Office for a particular field or discipline to safeguard the

rights of individuals and subjects, the validity of results, or the integrity of collections or to

accommodate the legitimate interest of investigators. A grantee or investigator also may

request a particular adjustment or exception from the cognizant NSF Program Officer.

c. Investigators and grantees are encouraged to share software and inventions created under the

grant or otherwise make them or their products widely available and usable.

d. NSF normally allows grantees to retain principal legal rights to intellectual property developed

under NSF grants to provide incentives for development and dissemination of inventions,

software and publications that can enhance their usefulness, accessibility and upkeep. Such

incentives do not, however, reduce the responsibility that investigators and organizations have

as members of the scientific and engineering community, to make results, data and collections

available to other researchers.

e. NSF program management will implement these policies for dissemination and sharing of

research results, in ways appropriate to field and circumstances, through the proposal review

process; through award negotiations and conditions; and through appropriate support and

incentives for data cleanup, documentation, dissemination, storage and the like."

The National Institutes of Health has similar guidelines but specifies a timeline for sharing data in

relation to initial publication of research results (National Institutes of Health, 2007). Many journals also

require that raw data used in published graphs, tables, etc., be publicly available.

24


Similar policies exist internationally, but they vary widely from country to country, with some countries

having no formal policies. Before traveling to another country or collaborating with a foreign

researcher, it is always wise to review their policies for data management. If the international policies

differ from your institution's or funding agency's guidelines, establish a plan for the collection, analysis,

publication, and storage of the data in collaboration with your other researchers involved. Remember,

it is important to ensure that the plan does not violate any country' s policies and adequately considers

everyone's concerns and research needs.

Although many scientists embrace the idea of data sharing, there is some resistance. Scientists object to

the time and financial cost associated with sharing data, as well as sharing data they may want to

publish in the future. Funding agencies and scientific journals are beginning to address these concerns.

In international collaborations, tensions may arise when data sharing is required by the funding agencies

of some collaborating countries but not all. The Ethics of Data Sharing and Reuse in Biology (Duke & Porter, 2013) reviews data sharing issues and considers the ethics involved in data reuse, outlining the

types of acknowledgment data providers should receive for their contributions.

THE PROBLEM: Data Collection, Storage, and Sharing, and

Researcher Responsibility Watch this video describing data management and the data sharing nightmare.

Can you determine all of the data management errors made by the brown bear? Although humorous,

the video highlights serious issues that arise in this area of data collection, sharing, and ethical

responsibility in research.

THE SOLUTION: Open Science Framework Researchers need to a way to store data that protects the integrity of the data and confidentiality of the

participants, as well as a way to share this data with collaborators and the public. One possible solution

to this dilemma of collection, storage, and sharing is the Open Science Framework.

The Open Science Framework (OSF) supports the entire research lifecycle: planning, execution,

reporting, archiving, and discovery. This revolutionary software is meant to aid researchers in all of the

issues of data management and sharing.

Case Study Two faculty members at American University A are working with faculty members at Argentina

University, Portugal University, and French University. The research project is a psychology informatics

project, which will create large amounts of data that will need to be collected, stored, and shared

between the research parties.

The majority of the data collection and analysis will be done by graduate students at the respective

universities. The two American faculty members are the Pis on the project, which is funded by an

25


international agency that stipulates the data must be shared with the public within 12 months of

publication.

Exercise Consider the following questions and write a short paper that will you will use for discussion in the in

person section of this training.

l. What should the researchers consider in their data management plan?

2. Who owns the data?

3. What are some possibilities for storing the data so it will be accessible to all ofthe researchers?

4. What should the researchers do before sharing the data with the public? Do you have any

suggestions for how they could publically share the data?

26


Additional Resources

References Cited

Introduction • Ana, J., Koehlmoos, T., Smith, R., & Yan, L.L. (2013). Research Misconduct in Low- and Middle

Income Countries. PLoS Med. 10(3): e1001315. doi:l0.1371/journal.pmed.1001315.

• Association for Psychological Science. (2013). Psychological Science Sets New Standards for Research Reporting. Retrieved from: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/psychological-science-sets-newsta nda rds-for-resea rch-re po rt ing. htm I.

• John, L.K., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2012). Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices with Incentives for Truth-Telling. Psychological Science. 22(11): 1359-66. doi: 10.1177/0956797611430953. Retrieved from: http://pss.sagepub.com/content/22/11/1359.short.

• Kliegl, R. & Bates, D. (2011.) International collaboration in psychology in on the rise. Scientometrics. 87(1). 149-158. Print.

• Rhoades, L., & Eisenberger, R. (2002). Perceived organizational support: A review of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology. 87: 698-714.

• Simmons, J.P., Nelson, L.D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011) . False-Positive Psychology: Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything as Significant. Psychological Science. 23(5): 5234-32. doi: 10.1177 /0956797611417632. Retrieved from: http://pss.sagepub.com/content/22/11/1359.short.

Collaborative Research • American Psychiatric Association. (2014). Ethics Resources and Standards. Retrieved from:

http://www.psychiatry.org/practice/ethics/resources-standards.

• American Psychological Association. (2014) . Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Retrieved from: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx.

• American Psychological Association. (n.d.). Full Disclosure of Interests. Retrieved from: http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/disclosure-of-interests.pdf

• Bennett, L.M., Gadlin, H., & Levine-Finley, S. (2010). Collaboration & Team Science: A Field Guide. National Institutes of Health. Retrieved from: https://ccrod.cancer.gov/confluence/ download/attachments/ 47284665/TeamScience FieldGui de.pdf.

• Brylinski, J. (n.d.). Human Subject Research and Developing Countries: Beneficence and Protection of Human Rights. Retrieved from : http://www.fdli.org/ docs/ default-documentli bra ry/ bryl inskij. pdf?sfvrs n=O.

• Byrne, B.M., Oakland, T. Leong, F.T.L., van de Vijver, F.J.R., Hambleton, R.K., Cheung, F.M., & Bartram, D. (2009) . A critica l analysis of cross-cultural research and testing practices: Implications for improved education and t ra ining in psychology. Training and Education in Professional Psychology. 3(2): 94-105. doi: 10.1037a0014516.

27


• Central Intelligence Agency. (n.d.). The World Factbook. Retrieved from: https://www.cia.gov/librarv/publications/the-world-factbook/.

• Dis is, M.L., & Slattery, J.T. (2010). The Road We Must Take: Multidisciplinary Team Science. Science Translational Medicine. 2(22): 22cm9. doi : 10.1126/scitranslmed.300421. Retrieved from: http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/2/22/22cm9.full.

• International Federation of Social Workers. (2012). Statement of Ethical Principles. Retrieved from: http://ifsw.org/policies/statement-of-ethical-principles/.

• International Union of Psychological Science. (2013). Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists. Retrieved from: http://www. i u psys. net/a bout/gove rna nee/ u n iversa 1-decla ration-of-et hi ca 1-princi pies-for-psychologists. htm I.

• International Test Commission. (2008) . ITC Home. Retrieved from : http://www.intest com.org/. • Jimerson, S. R., Oakland, T. D., & Farrell, P. T. (Eds) (2007). The Handbook of International Schoof

Psychology. London: SAGE. • Leach, M.M., & Oakland, T. (2010). Displaying ethical behaviors by psychologists when standards

are unclear. Ethics & Behavior, 20, 197-206.

• Public Health Leadership Society. (2002) . Principles of Ethical Practice of Public Health. Retrieved from: http://www.apha.org/NR/rdonlyres/1CED3CEA-287E-4185-9CBDBD405FC60856/0/ethicsbrochure.pdf.

• Michigan Institute for Clinical & Health Research. (2014). Clinical and Translational Research. Retrieved from: http://www.michr.umich.edu/about/clinicaltranslationalresearch.

• Rosenfield, P. (1992). The potential of transdisciplinary research for sustaining and extending linkages between the health and socia l sciences. Social Science and Medicine. 35(11): 1343-1357.

• Sexton, V. S., & Hogan, J. D. (Eds.) (1992) . International psychology: Views from around the world. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.

• Stevens, M. J., & Wedding,D. (2004). Handbook of international psychology. New York: BrunnerRoutledge, 2004. Print.

• UNESCO. (2014). Universal Copyright Convention, with Appendix Declaration relating to Articles XVII and Resolution concerning Articles XI 1952. Retrieved from : http://porta l.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL ID=15381&URL DO=DO TOPIC&URL SECTION=201.html.

• United Nations. (2014). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/.

• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (n.d.). Informed Consent - FAQs. Retrieved from: http://answers.hhs.gov/ohrp/categories/1566.

• U.S. Department of State. (n.d.). Countries and Regions. Retrieved from: http://www.state.gov/countries/.

• U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2009). Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994. Retrieved from: http://www. fda .gov I regu lato ryi nfo rmation/legis lation/federa lfoodd rug a ndcos met icactfdcact/si gnificantamendmentstothefdcact/ucm148003.htm.

• World Health Organization. (2014). Ethics. Retrieved from: http://www.w ho.int/ topics/ethics/en/.

• World Health Organization. (2014). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/.

28


• World Medical Association. {2014). Declaration of Helsinki - Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. Retrieved from: http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/

• World Medical Association (2014). WMA International Code of Medical Ethics. Retrieved from: http://www. wma. net/ en/30pu blicatio ns/lOpo licies/ c8/.

Conflict of Interest • Academy Health. {2004). Ethical Guidelines for Managing Conflicts of Interest in Health Services

Research. Retrieved from: https://www.academyhealth.org/ files/ethics/report.pdf.

• American Psychological Association. (2014). Retrieved from: http://www.apa.org/. • American Psychological Association. (2014). Conflict of Interest and Commitments. Retrieved

from: http://www.apa.org/research/responsible/conflicts/index.aspx. • American Psychological Association . (2014). Full Disclosure of Interests. Retrieved from:

http://www.apa.org/pubs/authors/disclosure-of-interest s.pdf. • Ancker, J.S. & Flanagin, A. (2007). A comparison of interest policies at peer-reviewed journals in

different scientific disciplines. Science and Engineering Ethics, 13, 147-157. • Antonuccio, D.O., Danton, W.G., & Mcclanahan, T.M. (2003) . Psychology in the prescriptions

era: Building a firewall between marketing and science. American Psychologist, 58, 1028-1043. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.58.12.1028.

• Arizona Board of Regents. (2011). Conflict of Interest. Retrieved from: http://nau.edu/ uploadedFiles/Administrative/Folder Templates/ Forms/3-901-Conflict-ofI nte rest. pdf.

• Georgia Regents University: Augusta. (2013) . Individual Conflicts of Interest Policy. Retrieved from: htt p://pol icy.g ru. edu/ 12-4-1-individu a I-co nflicts-of-i nte rest/.

• Greenwald, A.G., Poehlman, T.A., Uhlmann, E.L., & Banaji, M.R. (2009). Understanding And Using The Implicit Association Test: Ill. Meta-analysis Of Predictive Validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology._97(1 ): 17-41. Print.

• Levinsky, N.G., (2002). Nonfinancial conflicts of interest in research. New England Journal of Medicine. 5: 759-761. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200212263472617. Retrieved from: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM200212263472617.

• National Academy of Science. (2009). Examples of Biased Reporting in Clinical Research. Retrieved from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ books/ NBK22940/box/a2001902bbbb00035/?report=objectonly.

• National Institutes of Health. (2014). Financial Conflict of Interest. Retrieved from: http ://grants. n ih.gov /grants/pol icy/ coil.

• National Institutes of Health. (1995). Objectivity in Research. National Institutes of Health Guide. 24(25). Retrieved from: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not95-179.html.

• Sell, D. (2013). Industry Ties a Prescription for Conflict on FDA Panels. Retrieved from: http://articles.philly.com/2013-03-16/ business/37747588 1 adviso ry-committeesch izoph ren ia-drug-fda.

• Thompson, D.F. (1993) . Understanding financial conflicts of interest. New England Journal of Medicine. 329: 573.

• U.S. Government Printing Office. (n.d.). Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. Retrieved from: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/ USCODE-2011-title35/pdf/ USCODE-2011-title35-partllchapl8.pdf.

29


• Weiss, R. (2006). 'Serious Misconduct' by NIH Expert Found. Retrieved from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/ article/ 2006/06/ 13/AR2006061301528.html?referrer=email%20;%20http://www.a hrp.org/cms/content/view/ 405/ 119/%29.

• Wise, J. (2001). Pfizer accused of testing new drug without ethical approval. Retrieved from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1119465/.

• World Medical Association. (2014). WMA Statement of Conflict of Interest. Retrieved from: http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/i3/.

Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship • American Psychological Association . (n.d.). Contract Regarding Publication Intent. Retrieved

from: http://www.apa.org/science/leadership/students/ authorship-agreement.pdf. • American Psychological Association . (n.d.). Point and Methods Assignment for Activities

Associated with Research Manuscript/Poster. Retrieved from: http://www.apa.org/science/ leadership/students/ authorship-determination.pdf.

• Ana, J. , Koehlmoos, T., Smith, R., & Yan, LL. (2013). Research Misconduct in Low- and MiddleIncome Countries. PLoS Med. 10(3): e1001315. doi:l0.1371/journal.pmed.1001315.

• Bartle, S. A., Fink, A. A., & Hayes, B. C. (2000). Psychology of the scientist : LXXX. Attitudes regarding authorship issues in psychological publications.Psychological Reports 86(3): 771-788.

• Delibero, L. (1997). Field Notes: Mr. Holland's Opus. Lingua Franca, Inc. Retrieved from: http://linguafranca.mirror.theinfo.org/9704/fn9704.html.

• Fang, F.C., Steen, R.G., & Casadevall, A. (2012).Misconduct accounts fo r the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 109(42): 17028-17033. Print.

• Leask, B. (2007) . Plagiarism, cultural diversity and metaphor- impligations for academic staff development. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 31(2): 183-199. Doi: 10.1080/02602930500262486.

• Nature Publishing Group. (2007). Turkish physicisits face accusations of plagiarism. Nature. 449(6): 8.

• Nature Publishing Group. (2007). Plagiarism? No, we' re just borrowing bette r English. Nature. 449(11): 658.

• Northern Arizona University. (2014). Academic Integrity Policy. Retrieved from: https ://po I icy. na u. ed u/po I icy/policy. as px ?nu m = 100601.

• Northern Arizona University. (2014). NAU Student Handbook. Retrieved from: http:// na u. ed u/stude nt-life/Stude nt-H and book/.

• Osborne, J.W., & Holland, A. (2009). What is authorship, and what should it be? A survey of prominent guidelines for determining authorship in scientific publications. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation. 14: 1-9.

• Roig, M. (2010). Plagiarism and self-plagiarism: What every author should know. Biochemia

Medico. 20: 295-300. • Steneck, N. (2007). Introduct ion to the Responsible Conduct of Research. U.S. Department of

Health and Human Services: Office of Research Integrity. Retrieved from: http:// ori . h hs.gov I sites/ d efa u lt/ fi les/rcri nt ro. pdf.

• WriteCheckVideos. (2012, November 16). 10 Types of Plagiarism. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch ?v=EF5eFeJM pl A.

30


Data Management • Duke, C. S., & Porter, J. H. (2013). The Ethics of Data Sharing and Reuse in

Biology. Bioscience. 63(6): 483-489. Retrieved from https://www.dataone.org/sites/all/documents/DukePorter2013.pdf

• Michener, W.K., Brunt, J.W., Helly, J.J., Kirchner, T.B., & Stafford, S.G. (1997). Non-geospatial Metadata for the Ecological Sciences. Ecological Applications. 7(1), 330-342. Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/publication/222535033 Meta-information concepts for ecological data management/links/02e7e51e459d7a4380000000.

• National Institutes of Health. (2007). NIH Data Sharing Policy. Retrieved from: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/ data sharing/.

• National Science Foundation. (2010). Data Management & Sharing Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs). Retrieved from: http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/dmpfaqs.jsp.

• National Science Foundation. (2013). Proposal and award policies and procedures guide. Retrieved from: http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub summ.jsp?ods key=aag.

• NYU Health Sciences Library. (2012, December 19). Data Sharing and Management Snafu in 3 Short Acts. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2zK3sAtr-4.

• Open Science Framework. (2014). Project Management with collaborators, project sharing with the public. Retrieved from: https://osf.io/.

• Oerafrica. (2010, October 11). Ethics and Integrity in Data Use and Management- slides with audio. Retrieved from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GreQRXOE2gY.

• UCONN. (2014). Why Create a Data Management Plan? Retrieved from: http:ijclassguides.lib.uconn.edu/dmp.

• UCONN. (2014). Write a Data Management Plan. Retrieved from: http:// classgu ides. lib. ucon n. ed u/ content. ph p? pid=355458&s id=2906884.

• UK Data Archive. (2014). Create and Manage Data. Retrieved from: http://www.data· archive .ac. u k/ create-manage.

Other Resources

General • American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of

conduct. Retrieved from: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx.

• American Psychological Association. (2014). International Perspectives in Psychology. Retrieved from : http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/ipp/.

• Columbia University. (2004). Responsible Conduct of Research Courses Portal. Retrieved from: http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/rcr/index.html.

• Leach, M.M. (2012)._The Oxford handbook of international psychological ethics. New York: Oxford University Press.

• Leach, M.M., & Harbin, J.J. (1997). Psychological Ethics Codes: A Comparison ofTwenty-four Countries. International Journal of Psychology. 32(3): 181-192. doi: 10.1080/002075997400854.

• Mertens, D.M., and Ginsberg, P.E. (2009). The Handbook of Social Research Ethics. SAGE.

• Pashler, H., & Wagenmakers, E.J. (2012). Editors' Introduction to the Special Issue on Replicability in Psychological Science.: A Crisis or Confidence. Perspectives in Psychological Science. 7(6): 528-530. doi: 10.1177/1745691612465253 Retrieved from: http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7 /6/528.short.

31


• Smith, D. (2003). Five Principles for Research Ethics. Monitor on Psychology. 34(1): 56-59. Retrieved from: http://www.apa.org/monitor/jan03/principles.aspx.

• The Department of Health and Human Services. (2014). Office of Research Integrity. Retrieved from: www.ori.hhs.gov.

Collaborative Research • American Psychological Association. (2014). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of

Conduct. Retrieved from: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx

• Bennett, L.M., Gadlin, H., & Levine-Finley, S. (2010). Collaboration and team science: a field guide. Retrieved froml http://ombudsman.nih.gov/collaborationTS.html.

• Byrne, S., Posiolova, L.V., Shean, D.E., Daubar, l.J., Cull, S.C., Mcewen, A.S., Mellon, M.T., Kennedy, M.R., Dundas, C.M., Seelos, F.P., Harrison, T.N., Thomas, N., Reuter, A., Edgett, K.S., Arvidson, R.E., Cantor, B.A., Murchie, S.L., & Seelos, K.D. (2009). Distribution of Mid-Latitude Ground Ice on Mars from New Impact Craters. Science. 325(5948): 1674-1676. Print.

• International Test Commission. (2008). ITC Home. Retrieved from : http://www.intestcom.org/. • The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (2011). In The United Nations. Retrieved from

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

• World Health Organization. (n.d) . International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Retrieved from: http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/.

Conflicts of Interest • Sales, B.D., & Folkman, S. (Eds.). (2000). Ethics in research with human participants. Washington,

DC: American Psychological Association.

Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship • Roig, M . (2010). Plagiarism: An Ounce of Prevention ... ASQ Higher Education Brief. Retrieved

from : http://asq.org/edu/2010/06/continuous-improvement/plagiarism-an-ounce-ofprevention-.pdf.

• SpotOnlondonPolicy. (2012, November 12). Fixing the Fraud: how do we safeguard science from misconduct?. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3utUERQx2sc.

32

Documents

Psychological and Social Sciences...Psychological and Social Sciences ... respectfully address and resolve ideas, help translate when there are differences in concepts, methodologies,