Research ethics survey

[JFRUGOLI at BIO.TAMU.EDU]

Pheobe Rice wrote:
>It seems to me that most people (pretty much) agree in any discussion 
>of
>abstract
>ethics - the big arguements come up when people try to apply them (or 
>weasel
>out
>of them).

My point in one part of the ethics presentation (which I'm trying to 
reenforce with real life survey results) is that often there is not 
agreement on what the "responsibilities" of scientific positions are-and 
that there is the assumption by both parties that they're operating by 
the same set of rules when in fact they're not.  This leads to some 
messy situations which need not have happened-one of the workshop 
instructors called this "preventative ethics".

In the survey thus far, grad student assumptions range all over the 
place, from the feeling that PIs demand too much by expecting more than 
a 40 hour week to the one who believes that its his responsibility to 
make the PI famous.  Unfortunately, the faculty end of the survey is a 
bit skewed-the people who respond tend to be faculty who care about 
students a lot-the ones who don't even know the names of the students in 
their lab, or who can't understand why a student is frustrated after 8 
years in the lab and no end in sight, don't respond to surveys like 
this.

But the survey has been helpful to me, and I want to thank all of you 
who did respond-it will enable me to give concrete examples of how the 
unwritten nature of scientific interactions can lead to conflicting 
expectations.  And general comments on this topic are also welcome....

Julia Frugoli
Dartmouth College

visiting grad student at
Texas A&M University
Department of Biological Sciences
College Station, TX 77843
409-845-0663
FAX 409-847-8805

"Evil is best defined as militant ignorance."
																										Dr. M. Scott Peck