Author Archives: admin

Two scientists (‘we’re not ethicists’) step up to teach research ethics, and have fun doing it.

Posted on by

In the latest issue of The Scientist, there’s an article (free registration required) by C. Neal Stewart, Jr., and J. Lannett Edwards, two biologists at the University of Tennessee, about how they came to teach a graduate course on research ethics and what they learned from the experience:

Both of us, independently, have been “victims” of research misconduct – plagiarism as well as fabricated data. One day, while venting about these experiences, we agreed to co-teach a very practical graduate course on research ethics: “Research Ethics for the Life Sciences.” The hope was that we could ward off future problems for us, our profession, and, ultimately, society.

Continue reading→

The project of being a grown-up scientist (part 1).

Posted on by

I’m writing this post (and the posts following it, so the bites are of reasonable size) at the urging of Bill Hooker, with whom I’ve talked about these issues in real life.
The idea of becoming a grown-up in the scientific community is a thread that runs through a lot of my posts (and also guides my thinking as I teach my “Ethics in Science” class), but it turns out I hadn’t written a proper post to explain the idea. This set of posts will at least serve as a first attempt.

Continue reading→

links for 2008-02-05

Posted on by

Who has the biggest snakepit?

Posted on by

As I was weighing in on aetosaurs and scientist on scientist nastiness, one of the people I was talking to raised the question of whether careerist theft and backstabbing of professional colleagues was especially bad in paleontology. (Meanwhile, a commenter expressed surprise that it wasn’t just biomedical researchers who felt driven to cheat.)
I don’t know. So I figured I’d put it to my readers:

Continue reading→

Blogroll Amnesty Day

Posted on by

By way of Abel and DrugMonkey (among others), I see that today is Blogroll Amnesty Day. Jon Swift has the must-read post on the origins of the day and what it means now:

The idea that links are the capital of the blogosphere seems so obvious that you would think an economist like Atrios of Eschaton would have realized it long ago. And as he is a progressive who has accumulated quite a bit of link wealth, you might also think he would be in favor of redistributing some of that wealth instead of just letting it trickle down. So when he announced last year that he was declaring February 3 Blogroll Amnesty Day, and other bloggers followed suit, I assumed he meant that he was opening his blogroll up to the masses…
When February 3 rolled around, many bloggers discovered to their horror that instead of adding new blogs to his blogroll he was throwing many off, including some bloggers who were his longtime friends. Blogroll Amnesty Day, it turned out, was a very Orwellian concept. Instead of granting amnesty to others he was granting amnesty to himself not to feel bad for hurting others feelings. Though Atrios has stubbornly refused to acknowledge that he made a mistake, some bloggers who initially joined him, backtracked. Markos of the Daily Kos instituted a second blogroll that consisted of random links from diarists. PZ Myers of Pharyngula now has real Blogroll Amnesty Days where he invites anyone who has blogrolled him to join his blogroll. And in the wake of the bloodletting quite a number of smaller blogs, like my friend skippy the bush kangaroo, changed their own blogroll policies and now link more freely to others.
Ironically, Blogroll Amnesty Day had a net positive effect for the blogosphere as a whole. I discovered a number of great blogs and made new friends and I am sure that is true for others as well. And so instead of remembering February 3 as a day that will live in infamy, let’s turn this day into a celebration of the power of smaller blogs. Let’s recognize that building an inclusive community of diverse voices is what the blogosphere should be about, not creating a new elite to replace the old mainstream media elite.

Continue reading→

links for 2008-02-03

Posted on by

Way to represent your professional community, dude!

Posted on by

In response to my earlier post on the allegations of ethical lapses among a group of paleontologists studying aetosaurs, a reader sent me a message posted to a public mailing list of vertebrate paleontologists. The message gives a glimpse of an attitude toward others in one’s professional community that, frankly, I find appalling, so I’m going to give you my dissection of it.
Please note that the quoted passages below comprise the entire post to the mailing list, save for the poster’s (presumably real) name, which I’m excising because I’m not sure I want Google to link him in perpetuity with an attitude that he may grow out of.

Continue reading→

Peer reviewer behaving badly (and why it matters).

Posted on by

Revere already flagged this story, but I’m going to try to move beyond the forehead slapping to some analysis of why a journal’s confidentiality rules might matter. (I’ll leave it to Bill, Bora, Jean-Claude, and their posse to explain how a thoroughgoing shift to “open science” might make such situations go away.)
The story, as reported in The Chronicle of Higher Education, is that a peer reviewer for the New England Journal of Medicine, reviewing a manuscript that reported negative findings about the safety of a diabetes drug, broke confidentiality rules and sent a copy of that soon-to-be-published manuscript to the drug’s manufacturer:

Continue reading→