ethics prof. toby walsh nicta and unsw. ethics why? why should you worry about ethics? what? ...
TRANSCRIPT
EthicsProf. Toby WalshNICTA and UNSW
Ethics
Why? Why should you worry about ethics?
What? What should you worry about?
How? How do you decide what to do?
Why should you worry?
You’ll be found out …
It will have consequences ..
You may have to resign …
You may be fired …
You could end up in prison …
Your reputation is at stake ..
What should you worry about?
Research misconduct
Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results
Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Fact Sheet, October 14, 1999
Research misconduct
Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results Fabrication is making up results and
recording or reporting them
Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Fact Sheet, October 14, 1999
Research misconduct
Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results Falsification is manipulating research
materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record
Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Fact Sheet, October 14, 1999
Research misconduct
Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results Plagiarism is the appropriation of
another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit, including those obtained through confidential review of others’ research proposals and manuscripts
Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Fact Sheet, October 14, 1999
Beyond misconduct
Ilegal activities Money Drugs …
Human and animal ethics Computers don’t have rights Universities are quite good at
monitoring human and animal studies!
It impacts on a conference like IJCAI-11 …
Reviews discarded Conflicts of interest
Papers rejected Falsification
Even one of the Distinguished Papers raised problems!
And in one case, disciplinary action has been taken Your funding agency probably
requires you to take action …
IJCAI’s new conflict of interest policy
A potential conflict of interest exists when a person is involved in making a decision that could result in financial or professional gain (such as the selection of a paper for a conference) for that person, a close associate of that person or that person’s institution or company.
IJCAI’s new conflict of interest policy
A close associate is someone that is employed at the same institution or
company; advisor or current or recent graduate
student (within last 60 months); co-author within the last 48 months; investigator on the same grant or
research project; actively working on a project
together or on a similar topic; related by birth or marriage or
friendship; in deep personal animosity.
How do you decide what to do?
Actions
Consult Advisor Colleague Mentor Editor Program Chair University research office …
Actions
Protect yourself Keep records Record time stamps Get a witness Tread very carefully
Reputation at stake! Speak hypothetically
Actions
Communicate Danger of email Use the phone Visit in person Declare conflicts …
Actions
Trust your gut When you think you might need to
speak to a lawyer, it is already too late!
If you feel uncomfortable, it is time to act
You have responsibilities to act E.g. ARC requirements to report
Ethical speed bumps
Authorship
Citation
Reviewing
Experimentation
Authorship
See Judy’s talk
My advice Try to agree up front who is an
author and what is the order of authors
Some questions to consider: Would the paper exist without this
person? If the other authors fell sick, could
this person present the talk?
Authorship
See Judy’s talk
My advice When deciding the author order, try
to have one rule across all your papers However, your rule may conflict
with mine! Keep it simple
Mine: alphabetical order
Authorship
See Judy’s talk
My advice When deciding the author order, try
to have one rule across all your papers However, your rule may conflict
with mine! Keep it simple
Mine: alphabetical order Mine: otherwise I go last
Citation
See Judy’s talk
Credit where credit is due If we stand on the shoulders of
others, we should give them fair credit
We’re not in it for the money!
Citations only get more important Grants, tenure, …
Reviewing
Ethical minefield Material under review is strictly
confidential
Stakes are high Publish or perish People’s egos/livelihood is at stake
Anonymous Permits “bad” behaviours Role of author feedback!
First past the post Credit is only given to the 1st to publish
Reviewing
DO Declare conflicts & excuse yourself
where appropriate Treat all material in confidence Be objective (if you can’t, don’t review
this particular work) Be constructive
Think how your text will be received!
DON’T Review work where you have a conflict Wage vendettas, promote religions, … Now work on this problem (at least till
the work is published)
Experimentation
Recall, this is where 40% of scientific misconduct takes place!
Avoid the temptation to take shortcuts Nature will find you out There’s always a curve ball waiting
Remember 1% inspiration 99% perspiration
Experimentation
DO Keep good records (eg raw data) Look at the data Report enough detail to enable
replication Publish corrections promptly
DON’T Be selective
Cherry picking results! Obfuscate
Final words
Conclusions
Many ethical situations await you It’s only to be expected!
Take care Your reputation is your greatest
(only?) asset
Don’t worry Many others will have tread the
same road And can offer advice
Barcelona, I’m listening …