Ethics and the Welfare of the Physics Profession

1. Ethics and the Welfare of the Physics Profession Kate Kirby, Frances Houle, Joe Hamilton, Peter Meyers, Rocky Kolb APS Task Force on Ethics

2. Perspective of physics community: the rigor of physics minimizes misconduct 2002 2 data fabrication events reported An awakening APS issues ethics statements mainly addressing publications: www.aps.org/statements Ethics taskforce charged with assessing the state of ethics education in physics and APS ethics-related programs, and recommending new actions

3. Scope • Definition of ethics • The APS Task Force on Ethics • Concerns of the physics community • Lessons learned from investigations into data falsification events • APS actions in 2004 and beyond

4. What does “Professional Ethics” mean ? • Federal (legal) definition of misconduct centers on reporting of research results:Fabrication, Falsification, Plagiarism • Task force’s definition : • Truthful, careful handling and reporting of data • Responsible, respectful interactions with colleagues and subordinates • Adherence to APS publication guidelines, including proper recognition of research contributions

5. What is not a violation of professional ethics • Honest error in recording or analysis of data, provided errata and retractions are made promptly • Honest differences of opinion • Personality clashes

6. Ethics issues outside of the scope of this talk • Ethical application of the results of physics research • Consideration of environmental impacts of research in physics • Conflicts of interest • Use of scarce research resources

7. Sources of information Surveys, interviews, Web research: APS Units POPA Ethics chair Physical Review Related Societies The Task Force probed • ethics education • ethics awareness • occurrences of ethics violations • other ethics concerns • suggestions for effective ethics training Surveys: Physics dept chairs SPS Junior members Surveys: Selected corporations Large collaborations

8. APS Ethics activities prior to 2003 Surveys, interviews, Web research: APS Units POPA Ethics chair Physical Review Related Societies • Units focus on technical programs only • Panel on Public Affairs (POPA) Ethics subcommittee writes statements in response to events • Council approves statements on what is ethical and what is not • Physical Review editors investigate publication issues (mainly plagiarism and authorship)

9. Academic Sector Surveys: Physics dept chairs SPS Junior members

10. Where do young physicists learn about ethics? Junior members Undergraduates Ethics education in physics is largely informal “the silence that exists now”

11. Keeping a lab notebook: Do young physicists learn how to record and analyze data? Junior members (all settings)

12. Undergraduates In research groups (if they participated in one) In lab courses

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

14. What is a research record today ? • What constitutes original data? What is the best way to conserve original data in electronic form? • What sorts of records should be kept of a research project? What if the project involves multiple groups and multiple institutions? • What is the best type of research record when most of it is in electronic form? How can the record be preserved for the future when electronic formats are constantly changing? • Does teaching undergrads how to do labs and report the results help them create a record in today’s research settings?

15. How ethics-related topics are addressed in physics departments 10% of department chairs reported having knowledge of ethical violations 80% of chairs said the 2002 events did not lead to increased emphasis on ethics

16. Jr. Members Responses to Open-ended Questions • 36% (267 respondees) wrote about what they felt were the most serious professional Ethics issues • 30% (227 respondees) wrote about what Ethics training or educational activities would be valuable: “Anything is better than the silence that exists now”

17. Ethics concerns of Junior Members of APS • Mistreatment by research supervisors • “abuse of grad students” • “exploitation”; viewed as cheap labor, not as students • Lack of credit for work done (inclusion as co-authors) • 8% reported pressure to do unethical things

18. Ethics concerns (Jr. ) cont’d • 62% of Jr. members thought APS guidelines on ethics should include treatment of subordinates • 39% have PERSONAL knowledge of ethics violations during their time as a graduate student

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

21. Recommendations of the APS Ethics Task Force Follow-up actions in 2004

22. 1.APSguidelinesandstatements • Recommendations: • Expand ethics statements to include topics other than publication: Treatment of subordinates, social responsibilities, intellectual property • Amend current APS guidelines to address additional issues in publication • Actions: • New statement approved in 2004 on ethical treatment of subordinates • Addendum to guidelines approved covering proper referencing

23. 2. Education • Recommendations: • Sponsor ongoing discussions of ethics • Develop long-term and short-term ethics education programs • Work to help department chairs and group leaders proactively address ethics issues • Collect database of model programs and materials • Actions: • Ethics education is important new focus for APS: task force on ethics education to be appointed • To be addressed: • Best way for educational institutions to promote awareness of ethical standards • Who should receive training and when • Development of resources and materials • Promotion of educational events at APS meetings and articles in APS publications

24. 3. Recommended practices for data documentation and retention • Recommendations: • Protection of the research record in the electronic age • Awareness of legal requirements • Actions: • Proposal for NRC study made in the National Academies • Sources of funding to be identified

25. 4. International ethics standards • Recommendations: • Work with responsible organizations (eg IUPAP, other international scientific unions) to develop common standards • Include all areas of physics activity • Actions: • Focus is on working toward common ethics standards and practices in all countries • International association of physics editors currently working on • Investigation protocols • Responsibilities of authors’ institutions • Alerts to plagiarism • Legal differences between nations • Frequent meetings to exchange information • Some societies creating task forces like the APS’

26. 5. Ethics committee • Recommendation: • Consider whether to have formal standing committee on ethics • Actions: • Possible committee discussed • Proceed with focused task force for education and reconsider later

27. Open issues raised by surveys and misconduct reports What are the responsibilities of coauthors? How do we deal with the pressures to do sensational work?

28. What are the responsibilities of co-authors? • Discussed in Report of the Schoen Investigation Committee, Report of the Ninov Investigation Committee • Relationships based on trust but also “the first line of defense against misconduct”: how to strike a balance? • “Researchers unable or unwilling to accept responsibility for a paper should not be co-authors”

29. Responsibilities of co-authors (cont’d.) • Joint responsibility for a work: “shared credit must be matched with shared responsibility” • Maintain a complete research record • Check each others’ results • Complete and careful verification of every manuscript that carries one’s name • Circulation of manuscript to all authors prior to submission for publication • Issue corrections if needed

30. What earns the status of coauthor? • Generation and analysis of data • Supplying critical materials • Analysis of data taken by others • Construction of apparatus or writing computer codes used in work • Interpretation of data taken and analyzed by others • Securing funding for the project • Membership in long-term team with multiple related projects • Loan of equipment or codes • Consultations and discussions about project • Original idea for project with little participation in execution • Honorary coauthorship • Authors’ management or Director of institute

31. The perpetrator thinks she/he knows the answer and is just having a little problem with the data Experiments are poorly reproducible anyway so who’s to know? Career pressure D. Goodstein, Physics World, 11/2002 Seeds of professional misconduct Junior members voiced loud concerns over a system that rewards visibility over quality and provides incentives to cheat

32. Harris Poll, October 1, 2003: Scientists top list of “most prestigious occupations”* Prestige: “Strongly associated with respect…widely seen to do great work which benefits society and the people they serve.” *survey of all US adults

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