Professor Andrew Cheetham PVC (Research) 3 July 2008

1. Ethical Scholarship in Research Ethical Scholarship Forum Professor Andrew Cheetham PVC (Research) 3 July 2008 Provider Number: CRICOS #00917k

2. Ethical Scholarship in Research • Responsible Conduct of Research • Ethics of Research using Human Subjects • Ethics of Research using Animal Subjects

3. Research Code of Conduct • The Australia Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research – ACRCR (2007) Foster and maintain a research environment of intellectual honesty, integrity and scholarly scientific rigor by: • Respecting the truth and rights of those affected by the research • Managing conflicts of interest • Following proper practices of environment, health, safety and security • Promoting adoption of the code and conform to the institutions policies and procedures • Reporting research misconduct http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications/synopses/r39syn.htm

4. UWS Policy – Research Code of Conduct This policy (based around the ACRCR) forms a code of practice for the responsible conduct of research. It aims to: • promote the highest possible standards of research practice; • protect all those associated with the research from any harm that may arise from failures to maintain high standards of research conduct; • discourage misconduct and fraud through encouraging the open presentation and discussion of results via peer review mechanisms; • apply clear procedures for dealing with allegations of misconduct; • protect the rights of all those associated with the research, human and non-human alike

5. Plagiarism • Is the practice of claiming or implying original authorship of (or incorporating material from) someone else's written or creative work, in whole or in part, into one's own without adequate acknowledgement. • Correct referencing/acknowledgement is the key Extract from UWS Research Code of Conduct: (15) Good research practice requires researchers to pay attention to obtaining necessary permissions (includes permits, licences), correctly attributing authorship, acknowledging sources, correctly referencing and avoiding plagiarism.

6. Responsibility of Researchers in Data Management • Establish retention date and archive strategy in terms of the institutions policy, legislation and to enable sufficient time to allow reference by other interested parties including other researchers. • Data for Publication • Researchers given access to confidential information must maintain that confidentiality and ensure primary materials are kept in secure storage.

7. Authorship • Follow policies on authorship and agree on authorship of publication at an early stage in a project. • Include all authors, maintain signed acknowledgements of authorship for all publications. • Do not allow unacceptable inclusions of authorship • Ensure proper and fair acknowledgement of non-authors • Be guided by the Vancouver Protocol.

8. Vancouver Protocol Authorship should be based only on substantial contributions to: • conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of data; and to • drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and on • final approval of the version to be published. Conditions 1, 2, and 3 must all be met. Participation solely in the acquisition of funding or the collection of data does not justify authorship. General supervision of the research group is not sufficient for authorship. Any part of an article critical to its main conclusions must be the responsibility of at least one author.

9. Conflict of Interest • A conflict of interest exists where there is a divergence between the individual interests of a person and their professional responsibilities. • Researchers should: • read and understand the UWS policy on Conflict of Interest, • maintain records of activities that may lead to a conflict and • disclose any conflicts of interest or • if because of confidentiality you cannot disclose details you should declare the conflict and withdraw from the situation.

10. Introduction – Human Ethics • The federal government endorsed in March 2007 a new National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research which was developed jointly by: • National Health and Medical Research Council • Australian Research Council • Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee • “The new ethics rules strike a sensible balance between risk and benefit” • Australian Higher Education, 18 July 2007 http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/ethics/human/conduct/overview.htm

11. Overview The ethical conduct of research is a shared responsibility between: • Researchers who conduct and design research • Organisations which employ researchers • Organisations that fund research • Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) which review research • the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) which publishes guidelines about research

12. Principles: • Australia has an ethical review system whereby each research project is reviewed by an HREC. • The HREC must determine if the proposed research adheres to general ethical principles and is hence considered to be ethically acceptable. • The principles are: • Merit and Integrity • Respect for persons • Beneficence, and • Justice.

13. Merit and Integrity • Justifiable by its potential benefit, • Designed or developed using appropriate methods • Based on a thorough study of the current literature, as well as previous studies • Designed to ensure that respect for the participants is not compromised • Conducted or supervised by persons or teams with experience, qualifications and competence • Conducted using facilities and resources appropriate for the research.

14. Respect: • for human beings is a recognition of their intrinsic value. • requires having due regard for the welfare, beliefs, perceptions, customs and cultural heritage. • of the privacy, confidentiality and cultural sensitivities of the participants. • for human beings involves giving due scope, throughout the research process, to the capacity of human beings to make their own decisions. • respect for those unable to make their own decisions involves empowering them or providing for their protection.

15. Beneficence: • The likely benefit of the research must justify any risks of harm or discomfort to participants. • If there are no likely benefits to participants, the risk to participants should be lower. • Where the risks to participants are no longer justified by the potential benefits, the research must be suspended. • The likely benefit may be to the participants, to the wider community, or to both. • Researchers are responsible for: • designing the research to minimise the risks of harm or discomfort to participants; • clarifying for participants the potential benefits and risks of the research; and • the welfare of the participants in the research context.

16. Justice • The selection, exclusion and inclusion of categories of research participants is fair, and is accurately described in the results of the research; • The process of recruiting participants is fair; • There is no unfair burden of participation in the research; • There is fair distribution of the benefits of participation; • There is no exploitation of participants; and • There is fair access to the benefits of research.

17. Animal Ethics Researchers must comply with: • the Australian Code of Practice for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes • http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications/synopses/ea16syn.htm • the NSW Animal Research Act • http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/livestock/animal-welfare/research-teaching/factsheets/aw-fact01 • National Animal Welfare Bill 2003 [2004] • Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1985 • Guidelines issued by Gene Technology Regulator.

18. Animal Ethics - Continued • Researchers working with native species need approval from the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service. • All research or teaching exercises involving the use of animals must be approved by the UWS Animal Care and Ethics Committee. • The ACEC is a representative Committee made up of animal researchers, veterinarians, animal welfare representatives and independent members. • For more information http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/ethics/animal/index.htm

19. Animal Care and Ethics Committee • The ACEC has the responsibility to approve proposals (with or without modification) and provide ongoing monitoring of projects and animal holding facilities. • By law the Committee is required to maintain accurate records on the use and disposal of any animals at UWS. • As a general principle the ACEC accepts the use of animals in research and teaching providing there is: • a demonstrated educational or research benefit • no suitable alternatives available at the time eg. video • a minimal number of animals used • a demonstrated effort to minimise the likely impact on the welfare of the animals used.

20. Summary: Ethical considerations of a research project should be considered as an integral part of research planning,not as an additional or separate process. • Compliance with National Guidelines • Compliance with UWS Guirelines and protocols • Peer Review • Benefit Vs Risk • Protection of participants • Protection of researchers • Protection of the Reputation of UWS 20

21. Food for Thought Some questions that might help reduce the level of uncertainty are: • How do I personally feel about it? • How would an independent person feel about it? • How does it sit against the values of the University and the spirit of those values? • What guidance do the University's policies and procedures provide? • How would I justify my actions to others? • Is it in the best interests of the University? • How would it look on Page 1 of the Daily Bugle The key is if you are not sure seek guidance!