1 / 10

IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication PC-28:3 (September 1985)

x. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication PC-28:3 (September 1985). Peer Performance Evaluation. See last item on Proposal Project Overview

nguyet
Download Presentation

IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication PC-28:3 (September 1985)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. x IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication PC-28:3 (September 1985)

  2. Peer Performance Evaluation • See last item on Proposal Project Overview • See the template for this final assignment. For now, keep notes on how helpful and cooperative your partner and your lab mates are. Keep notes on your own collaborative skills.

  3. Research Ethics

  4. Ethical problems in engineering often concern harm or potential harm. • What things may be harmed? • Who is harmed by research misconduct? • Physicist Jan Hendrik Schön’s casehttp://www.chass.ncsu.edu/langure/Schon.htm • Civil Engineer John Sheilshttp://www.constructionweblinks.com/Resources/Industry_Reports__Newsletters/Nov_14_2005/misl.html • Other examples from other disciplines

  5. What is research ethics? Ethical conduct of these activities: Problem: falsifying or fabricating data Problems: Failing to account for anomalous data or to highlight critical info. for audience. Problem: plagiarizing or using placeholder data • Gathering data • Selecting and presenting data • Publishing research results

  6. How you present the data can mean the difference between life and death. • Investigation after Challenger accident focused on communication problems between Morton Thiokol and NASA. • See Tufte’s famous “damage index” – a better way to present information about the possible o-ring failure that caused the Challenger disaster. • from Visual Explanations (2000)

  7. Data on o-ring damage in field tests were used to calculate damage scores. Scores were then plotted against temperature.

  8. Different ethical theories may lead to different research behaviors.

  9. How would the four theories justify NSPE canons, rules, obligations? • Egoism (person’s best interests) • Virtue (group’s rules) • Utilitarianism (satisfaction of aggregate interests) • Moral Rights (never harm an individual)

  10. By Wednesday, March 11 See this ethics site at North Carolina State University. • Read slides 27-37 of this PP show (left-hand menu): • Ethical principles supporting research policies • In class, we will do exercise on slide 37 using Code of Ethics of National Society of Professional Engineers.

More Related