Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur

RESEARCH ETHICS
It is a long-established and revered tradition in the international research community that research is conducted and documented sincerely and honestly. Any deviation from these norTw -nderTw -ines the worth of the research conducted, iTw -pairs the credibility of the researcher, brings shame to the seniors, damages the integrity and reputation of the

2. Distortion means purposefully 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. 3. Plagiarism means the appropriation of another persons ideas, processes, results (including formulas and computer codes) or expressions without giving appropriate credit. Publishing or communicating the same content to multiple journals/conferences amounts to self-plagiarism. 4. Breach of confidentiality means making public data of confidential nature (such a personal data or those under contractual obligation from the sponsors). 5. Interference means unnecessarily creating hurdles for another researchers work by willfully damaging or concealing materials, processes, hardware, data, text, or similar research objects. The above-mentioned ideas are elaborated below. Objectivity and Unbiased Approach Research requires an open mind. While conducting research, theoretical or experimental, an investigator must be as objective as possible and must not be biased by any preconceived notion. There must not be any fabrication or manipulation of the data. The raw data, as obtained, should be reported. Accuracy and Authenticity of Results It is the foremost duty of a researcher to ensure accuracy and authenticity of the research findings. In case of experimental research, the accuracy of the methods used and the reproducibility of the experimental data need to be specified in all relevant publications and presentations. The details about the experiment should be provided in research papers in such a way that any other researcher would be able to repeat the experiment elsewhere. Thus, wherever appropriate, the name of the manufacturer, the purity of material used, the make and model of the major equipment employed in the study, and the experimental conditions should be specified in appropriate detail. Plagiarism Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary [1] defines the act of plagiarism as 1) 2) 3) 4) To use someone elses productions without duly crediting the source To steal and present the idea of others as ones own To commit literary theft To present an idea or product as new and original which is actually derived from an existing source.

Thus, plagiarism can be considered as stealing ideas and works of others and may be considered as an act of fraud [2].

Plagiarism occurs when one Makes marginal changes in the material of someone else and includes in his (or her) research document, Copies material prepared by someone elses personal website and reports it as his (or her) own, Uses data obtained by another research claiming them (explicitly or implicitly) as his (or her) own, Prepares a document based entirely on the work of someone else, or Makes a deliberate attempt to conceal plagiarism by slightly changing a few words.

In most cases, however, plagiarism can be avoided in academic setting by citing the source. Furthermore, use of material that can be considered as common knowledge (i.e., available in numerous sources like handbooks, manuals, atlas, mythological scripts, or as proverbs, etc.) is not a case of plagiarism. Often a person resorts to plagiarism unknowingly because he (or she) may not be may be aware of the source or of the practice of referencing. Sometimes, however, the attempt to adopt plagiarism is deliberate because the person presenting the work knowingly exceeds the limit of reasonable extent of reproduction or gets the work done by someone else and reproduces it as his (or her). Researchers must carefully search for and cite the sources of materials they are reproducing and limit the reproduction to the extent permitted by the doctrine of fair use. Deliberate plagiarism is a gross violation of the ethical code of conduct in research. Detection of Plagiarism Plagiarism is detected when one or more of the following conditions prevail: The reader recognizes a portion of the work as belonging to another author. There is a sudden change in the style of writing of the text, inconsistent with the style used in the entire text. The text sometimes presents materials unrelated to its basic theme. One or more passages of the texts submitted by two or more individuals are exactly the same. A software package, meant to detect plagiarism, detects common materials contained within two works (documents or codes).

Steps to Prevent Plagiarism The following steps are suggested to prevent plagiarism: 1. Materials on ethical code of conduct, copyrights, and referencing system should be developed and made available to the academic community (students and faculty members) of the Institute. 2. All students should declare that the materials they are submitting for class works, project reports, and theses are actually their own, that they have not resorted to any unethical means in getting the results or reporting them, and that they have adequately acknowledged the sources whenever they have used others works. 3. All submissions that are suspected to have contained copied passages, figures, tables, and code (in the case of computer programs) without acknowledgement of sources should be tested for plagiarism with the help of software packages that are specifically meant to detect plagiarism. 4. All cases of alleged plagiarism should be investigated into and, if found true, must be dealt with firmly, and such cases and the actions taken thereon should be given wide publicity (without divulging the names of accused person). Copyright Copyright (supported by the Copyright Act) protects the work that expresses original ideas or information in any form, namely, written words, music, images, sketches, video, etc. One is liable to be brought to trial in the court of law, if he (or she) violates the Copyright Act. Naturally, the Institute considers the copyright violation as an act of academic malpractice. It may be pointed out that any sketch, graph or photograph published in printed or electronic media is copyright protected. Therefore, if they are to be reproduced in any medium by other individuals, written permission from the corresponding copyright holders is necessary. In this context it is to be noted that copying a material from ones own earlier publication in the new document may run the risk of copyright violation (Self-Plagiarism), if such a reproduction is not explicitly permitted by the copyright holder (e.g., the publisher or the sponsoring agency, etc.) of the former publication. Honest Usage of Software If a standard software package (from public domain or otherwise) is used in the work, the relevant research publications should acknowledge the same. Similarly, when computer programs written by someone else is used, the source should be clearly cited. If the existing code is modified, the type and extent of modification should be clearly mentioned in the publication. Minor modification in an existing code or renaming of some of the code variables does not amount to an original research contribution.

Repetitive Reporting of Research Outcome There are situations where number of publications matter. However, that goal must not be accomplished by unethical means. It is unethical to publish the same set of data or material in more than one paper without citing the earlier source. Sometimes, however, when the contribution of the author(s) is voluminous or multi-thematic, such fragmentation may become unavoidable. In such a case the authors should refer to the relevant past publications and explicitly mention how the current publication is related to them. In addition, the basic idea(s) published in a communication/letter form may be expanded in the subsequent full paper(s) with due citation, as per convention. It is worth noting that software packages are available now-a-days in public domain (e.g., eTBLAST in http://invention.swmed.edu/etblast) for identifying similarity in the materials contained in separate publications. Due Acknowledgement In addition to what has been already discussed above on Repetitive Reporting of Research Outcome, acknowledgement is due to all who render helpful support to the research. Publications, for example, should explicitly acknowledge the positive contribution of reviewers (even if anonymous) and the sponsor (in case of externally sponsored research). Authorship If a research publication authored by several researchers arises out of a group-research activity, the principal/corresponding author will be responsible for deciding the list of authors and the order of appearance of the names of the co-authors in the publication. By merely providing workspace, standard experimental or computational facility, or advice on nearly trivial and/or uncorrelated aspect of a research project, one does not automatically become eligible for authorship in a publication. The person must make significant intellectual contribution to the research work to make that claim. Research supervisors get strongly associated with the students at every step of the research work: specifying the research topic, designing experiments, analyzing results, building theoretical models, interpreting the results, drawing conclusions, and documenting the research work. They, thus, have a natural claim for co-authorship in publications based on such research works. Prior written permission from the supervisor(s) is required if a research student wishes to publish a single-authored paper which is based on his (or her) research work. In the case of sponsored projects, the principal investigator is primarily responsible for formulating the project and defending the outcome of the project. Therefore, every research paper arising out of a sponsored project must have the name of the principal investigator as a co-author.

Obtaining Informed Consent The issue of obtaining informed consent becomes extremely important in case of multiple-authored publications. A coauthor in such a publication is entitled to include only that portion of the work that he (or she) has contributed after getting the written consent of the principal author to that effect. A second coauthor of the same publication cannot claim ownership of the aforesaid portion of work. He (or she) can, of course, include that portion of work in his (or her) thesis or publication with proper citation. Verbatim presentation of a large portion of a co-authored publication(s) in the thesis should be avoided. The principal author remains responsible to declare the extent and level of contribution made by the coauthors, if such information is sought by the Institute. Each author of a co-authored document is responsible for the findings, interpretations, and conclusions reported in a research document and has to accept the full responsibility of the results reported in case of any dispute concerning the publication. Legality and Decency Civic sense and decorum make it mandatory that a research work complies with the law of the country and is not intentionally offensive in nature. It is legally an offense not to exercise due care where harmful consequences for the researcher or for others are foreseeable. For instance, while working with hazardous materials, such as toxic or inflammable substances or high temperatures, an investigator must take all possible precautionary measures to ensure the safety of humans and assets around the workplace Decency demands that due respect should be shown to all concerned, including the members of the research group, colleagues, and supervisor(s). Impertinent discriminatory remarks based on caste, creed, gender, racial origin, or age are highly objectionable and should be avoided in any research document. Social and Human Values All human achievements must take the responsibility to ensure social well-being and must strive to avert or to mitigate foreseeable risks to the society. Supervisor-Student Relationship The supervisor has two roles: 1. Teaching or transferring his (or her) knowledge, skills, and research tools to the student and 2. Grooming the student to do original thinking and carry out independent research work and supervision in the future.

To play the roles effectively, a harmonious relationship needs to develop between the supervisor and the student. The period a research student spends with the supervisor should be pleasant, academically stimulating, productive, and mutually satisfying. Supervisor-Supervisor Relationship The Institute allows two supervisors for one research student in the following cases: An academic unit often considers joint supervision necessary when the subject of research requires approaches the expertise for which does not lie with one faculty member. A new faculty member with no experience of previous research guidance is assigned a research student. A sole supervisor retires before the completion of the research work. A sole supervisor of a student goes on leave for more than six months The supervisor is a Visiting Faculty.

Joint supervision may result in outstanding research work because of significant input from two supervisors. Unfortunately, it can also result in various forms of behavioural problems that can spoil the research culture and significantly inhibit the progress of the research work. To illustrate, two examples are cited below: 1. One of the supervisors dominates in decisions with regard to the approach to the research question, documentation of the work, and ordering of the names of the authors in papers, etc., much to the annoyance of the other supervisor. 2. One of the supervisors does not actively participate in the process of supervision but claims the same credit as that of the active supervisor. Incompatibility between the supervisors may hamper the students progress. It is necessary that the supervisors are also guided by certain ethical principles to ensure that the students research progress is not compromised. More specifically, this document wishes to emphasize the following research code of conduct and responsibilities: Research Code of Conduct A research student should Follow the ethical code of conduct discussed in this document; Give due credit to the supervisor in all publications where the supervisor has contributed to the formulation, analysis, or solution of a research problem; Declare that he (or she) will not (or has not) indulged in any form of research misconduct; and Refrain from fouling with other students equipment, data, and results.

Research supervisors should Guide students in areas where they are proficient; Spend adequate time on the research work of their students; Provide sufficient laboratory, computational, and library facilities to the students; Ensure the veracity of data, the validity of analysis, and the interpretation of results; Give enough freedom to the students to use their own ideas and approaches and motivate them to come out with something new and innovative; Insist on communicating research resultsinterim and finalin conferences and journals; Advise the students on the Institute regulations and guidelines pertaining to research and to the research ethics outlined in this document and other documents of the Institute (such as the Research Policy document and Maintenance of Research Data and Results); Ensure that the students do not adopt any unfair means for their research work; Instill in the students the ideas of research honesty, integrity, and rigour; Refrain from exploiting the students intellectually (for example, by demanding a large number of publications before achieving research milestones such as registration or synopsis submission or by publishing a students work in ones own name without the student as a co-author) or emotionally, Maintain a cordial and harmonious relationship with the research students and cosupervisors (if any); and Report cases of research misconduct to the Institute authorities.

Responsibilities of Administrative Bodies of the Institute The members of a Doctoral Scrutiny Committee should Advise on new ways of looking at the research problem and its solution methods; Critically scrutinize the work and comment on the suitability, originality, and adequacy of the work and on the conformance of the research work to the ethical code of conduct followed by the Institute and the research community; Report the cases of research misconduct to the Institute authorities.

The Heads of the academic units (Departments/Schools/Centers) should Consult with the Department Academic Committee while allocating a new research student to a supervisor taking into consideration the matching research interest areas and equitable distribution of research supervision load; Provide all facilities to the student to carry out the research work; Arrange DSC meetings to take stock of the progress of the research work and ensure that the research students benefit from the constructive suggestions of the DSC members;

Provide adequate facilities for maintenance of research data and results (duly indexed and securely stored) for the specified period of time after a research work comes to an end; Resolve supervisor-supervisor and supervisor-student conflicts; and Report cases of research misconduct to the Institute authorities.

The Dean (PGS & R) should Design research ethics related instructional materials and guide inclusion of these topics in research-level subjects; Publicize contents of this and other related documents widely in order to enhance awareness on research ethics among the research community of the Institute. Enquire and investigate into the reported cases of research misconduct (as per Institute rules) and implement the decisions, and bring these cases into the notice of the research community while keeping the names of the concerned individuals confidential.

The Institute administration should Develop laboratories and libraries to make the research environment selfsustaining; Launch academic programmes to meet deficiencies in technical and presentational skills of research students; Design reward policies to inspire adoption of ethical means for conducting creative research: and Firmly deal with reported cases of research misconduct and unethical research practices.

The above-mentioned ethical norms, issues, and code of conduct are general in nature. It goes without saying that there may be other issues and norms pertinent to a specific area of research. For example, research conducted in the biological fields, such as biotechnology, needs, in addition, to conform to the well-known bioethical principles of benevolence, respect of autonomy, and justice. Similarly, research involving humans and animals require a mandatory special ethical disclosure. See the Research Policy Document and various other guidelines on Referencing, Copyrights, etc., for further details on relevant and related topics.

References
[1] [2] Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, Ed. F. Mish, Merriam-Webster, Inc., Springfield, 2008. <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Plagiarize> The Plagiarism.Org Home Page. Ed. iParadigms, LLC. 2008, <http://www.plagiarism.org>.