There is one thing even more vital to science than intelligent methods; and that is, the sincere desire to find out the truth, whatever it may be. Charles Sanders Pierce

Of all the traits which qualify a scientist for citizenship in the republic of science, I would put a sense of responsibility as a scientist at the very top. A scientist can be brilliant, imaginative, clever with his hands, profound, broad, narrow but he is not much as a scientist unless he is responsible. Alvin Weinberg
Chapter 6: Discussion and Reflection Questions
1. What issues and concerns did you immediately react to intellectually and emotionally in this chapter?
2. Is it appropriate for Lance to rely so much on his graduate students and post-docs to contribute to grant proposal writing? To review manuscripts for the journals in the discipline?
3. What issues must Lance consider when using previously submitted grant proposals co-authored with others?
4. In what ways must Lance avoid bias and intellectual conflicts of interest when reviewing grant proposals and manuscripts from his peers?
Research Ethics
Chapter 6: Moving On Up
Discussion and Reflection Questions
Integration Questions
References and Resources

This chapter addresses peer review, including confidentiality and avoiding personal bias and conflict of interest. Upon your completion of this chapter, we hope that you will be able to identify the elements of responsible peer review of manuscripts and grant proposal. We also want you to learn about the problems and consequences of unethical decision making in peer review.

  << Previous Page Discussion/Reflection Page 1 of 3 Next Page >>