The absent professor: Why we don’t teach research ethics and what to do about it

American Journal of Bioethics

Volumn 2, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 38-49

  Eisen, Arri ^a   Berry, Roberta M ^b  

^a EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bioscience; Education; Ethics; Research; Social implications

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT; ANALYTICAL APPROACH; BIOETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL ETHICS; BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; CONTINUING EDUCATION; CURRICULUM; EDUCATION; ETHICS; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; GOVERNMENT; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HUMAN; INDUSTRY; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; MEDICAL ETHICS; MEDICAL RESEARCH; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE; PUBLIC RELATIONS; RESEARCH ETHICS; REVIEW; SCIENCE; TEACHING; UNITED STATES; UNIVERSITY;

ANALYTICAL APPROACH; BIOETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL ETHICS; BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CURRICULUM; EDUCATION, CONTINUING; EDUCATION, GRADUATE; ETHICS, PROFESSIONAL; ETHICS, RESEARCH; FACULTY; FEDERAL GOVERNMENT; FINANCING, GOVERNMENT; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HUMANS; INDUSTRY; INTERDISCIPLINARY COMMUNICATION; INTERINSTITUTIONAL RELATIONS; INTERPROFESSIONAL RELATIONS; PRIVATE SECTOR; PROFESSIONAL AUTONOMY; RESEARCH SUPPORT; SCIENCE; TEACHING; UNITED STATES; UNIVERSITIES;

EID: 0037865386     PISSN: 15265161     EISSN: 15360075     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/152651602320957556     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology. 2000. Criteria for accrediting engineering programs. Baltimore: ABET.
2. American Bar Association. 2001a. Model Rules of Professional Conduct. Available from: http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mrpc/mrpc_home.html.
3. American Bar Association. 2001b. Standards for approval of law schools and interpretations, ch. 3. Available from: http://www.abanet.org/lega led/standards/chapter3.html.
4. American Bar Association, Section on Legal Education and Bar Admissions. 2001. Bar admissions, the multistate professional responsibility examination. Available from: http://www.abanet.org/legaled/baradmissions/ bartests.html.
5. American Medical Association, Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs. 2001. Code of medical ethics: Current opinions with annotations. Available from: http://www.ama- assn.org/ama/pub/category/2503.html.
6. American Society of Gene Therapy. 2001. Official response. Available from: http://www.asgt.org/policy/index. html.
7. Beauchamp, T L., and J. F. Childress. 2001. Principles of biomedical ethics, fifth ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
8. Bebeau, M. J., and S. J. Tohma. 1994. The impact of a dental ethics curriculum on moral reasoning. Journal of Dental Education 58(9): 684-92.
9. Bebeau, M. J., K. D. Pimple, K. M. T Muskavitch, S. L. Borden, and D. H. Smith. 1995. Moral reasoning in scientific research: Cases for teaching and assessment. Indiana University: Poynter Center.
10. Brown, S., and M. W. Kalichman. 1998. Effects of training in the responsible conduct of research: A survey of graduate students in experimental sciences. Science and Engineering Ethics 4(4): 487-98.
11. Bulger, R. E., and S. J. Reiser. 1993. Studying science in the context of ethics. Academic Medicine 8(9): S5-S9.
12. Caplan, A. 1980. Evaluation and the teaching of ethics. In Ethics teaching in higher education, ed. D. Callahan and S. Bok. New York: Plenum Press.
13. Cohen, J. J. 2001. Trust us to make a difference: Ensuring public confidence in the integrity of clinical research. Academic Medicine 76(2): 209-14.
14. Council of Government Relations. 1999. The Bayh-Dole Act: A guide to the law and implementing regulations. Available from: http://www.cogr.edu/bayh-dole.htm.
15. Eastwood, S., P Derish, E. Leash, and S. Ordway. 1996. Ethical issues in biomedical research: Perceptions and practices of postdoctoral research fellows responding to a survey. Science and Engineering Ethics 2(1): 89-114.
16. Elliott, D., and J. E. Stern. 1996. Evaluating teaching and students' learning of academic research ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics 2(3): 345-366.
17. Freeman, J. M., and K. McDonnell. 2001. Tough decisions: Cases in medical ethics, second ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
18. Garrod, A., ed. 1993. Approaches to moral development: New research and emerging themes. New York: Teachers College Press.
19. Glagola, C., M. Kam, M. C. Loui, and C. Whitbeck. 1997. Teaching ethics in engineering and computer science: A panel discussion. Science and Engineering Ethics 3: 46380.
20. Goldie J., L. Schwartz, A. McConnachie, and J. Morrison. 2001. Impact of a new course on students' potential behaviour on encountering ethical dilemmas. Medical Education 35(3): 295-302.
21. Goodwin, C. D. 1996. Technology transfer at US universities: Seeking public benefit from the results of basic research. Technology and Health Care 4(3): 323-30.
22. Gunsalus, C. K. 1993. Institutional structure to ensure research integrity. Academic Medicine 68(9): S33-S38.
23. Heckert, J. R. 2. ABET's engineering criteria 2000 and engineering ethics: Where do we go from here? Available from: http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jherkert/.
24. Jonsen, A. R. 1998. The birth of bioethics. New York: Oxford University Press.
25. Judson, H. F 1996. The eighth day of creation: Makers of the revolution in biology, expanded ed. Plainview: Cold Spring Harbor Press.
26. Kalichman, M. W., and P J. Friedman. 1992. A pilot study of biomedical trainees' perceptions concerning research ethics. Academic Medicine 67(11): 769-75.
27. Kevles, D. J. 2000. The Baltimore case: A trial of politics, science, and character. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
28. Mastroianni, A. C., and J. P Kahn. 1998. The importance of expanding current training in the responsible conduct of research. Academic Medicine 73(12): 1249-54.
29. Moses, H. III, and J. B. Martin. 2001. Academic relationships with industry: A new model for biomedical research. JAMA 285(7): 933-35.
30. National Institutes of Health. 2001. Bioethics resources on the Web. Available from: http://www.nih.gov/sigs/ bioethics/casestudies.html.
31. National Institutes of Health, Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration. 1989. Requirement for programs on the responsible conduct of research in National Research Service Award institutional training. National Institutes of Health Guide for Grants and Contracts 18(45): 1.
32. National Science Board. 2002. Science and engineering indicators-2002. NSB-02-1. Arlington: National Science Foundation. Available from: http://www.nsf.gov/nsb.
33. National Society of Professional Engineers. 2001a. Code of ethics for engineers. Available from: http://www.nspe. org/ethics/eh1-code.asp.
34. National Society of Professional Engineers. 2001b. Proposed licensure model law. Available from: http://www.nspe.org/etweb/1I-00-2000_Licensure_Model_Law.asp.
35. Nature. 1999. Policy on papers' contributors. Nature 399:393.
36. North Carolina State University. 1998. Report of the committee on research ethics. Available from: http://www.fis.ncsu.edu/Grad/ethics/report.htm.
37. Piper, T. R., M. C. Gentile, and S. D. Parks. 1993. Can ethics be taught? Boston: Harvard Business School.
38. Public Health Service. 2000. Policy on instruction in responsible conduct in research. Available from: http://ori.dhhs.gov/html/programs/finalpolicy.asp.
39. Public Health Service. 2001. Responsible conduct in research education policy suspended. Available from: http://ori.dhhs.gov/ html/programs/congressionalconcerns.asp.
40. Somia, N., and I. M. Verma. 2000. Gene therapy: Trials and tribulations. Nature Reviews Genetics 1 (2): 91-99.
41. Shaw, G. 1997. Charting medical education's future with MSOP AAMC Reporter [online version]. Available from: http://www.aamc.org/newsroom/reporter/mtg97/msop.htm.
42. Starr, P 1982. The social transformation of American medicine. New York: Basic Books.
43. Stern, J. E., and D. Elliott. 1997. The ethics of scientific research: A guidebook for course development. Hanover: University Press of New England.
44. United States Medical Licensing Examination. 2001. USMLE bulletin: Examination content. Available from: http://www.usmle.org.
45. U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. 1996. Federally funded research: Decisions fora decade. In Law, science, and medicine, second ed., ed. J. Areen, P A. King, S. Goldberg, L. Gostin, and A. M. Capron. Westbury: Foundation Press: 371-75. Originally published May 1991.
46. Wenger, N. S., S. G. Korenman, R. Berk, and S. Berry. 1997. The ethics of scientific research: An analysis of focus groups of scientists and institutional representatives. Journal of Investigative Medicine 45(6): 371-80.