<< Previous Section | < Previous Page | Next Page > | Next Section >> Case: Sloppy Lab work Background: During the first year of graduate school, Tom has been taking courses and doing laboratory rotations. While in Professor Allen's laboratory, Tom makes several exciting observations. Professor Allen tells Tom that the results will be publishable in a major journal. Part 1: When Professor Allen goes to write the manuscript a month later, she finds that Tom did not record in his notebook the incubation medium and times for one group of experiments. Also, the computer files where Tom thinks he saved the information were accidentally erased. Questions: Can Professor Allen still write the paper? Would it make a difference if Tom said he could remember the details even though he didn't write them down? Would it make a difference if a technician working on the project said that he remembered even though Tom could not? Part 2: Professor Allen writes the paper, which is accepted for publication. Tom finishes his first year and returns to Professor Allen's laboratory. He begins where he left off, but in two attempts he cannot repeat the original finding. Questions: What should he and Professor Allen do about the paper assuming it has not yet been published? What should they do if the paper has been published? Part 3: Professor Allen receives a manuscript to review that contains experiments whose results make clear why Tom has been unable to make further progress with his experiments. Questions: Can Professor Alan share this information with Tom? What if the information was contained in a grant proposal? Derived from Fred Grinnel << Previous Section | < Previous Page | Next Page > | Next Section >> Chapter 1 Quick Links The Ethical Basis of RCRH The Nature of Science Research Integrity Professionalism in Science Practical Elements of Responsible Research Conduct Cases Bibliography Chapter 1 Download (PDF)