create new tag
, view all tags, tagging instructions
Return to Browse by

Return to RCR Case Studies

Please Comment on the Teaching Quality of the CASE


Please rate the CASE:

  • 5 stars = highest rating
  • 1 star = lowest rating
  • SCORE = average of all votes

Graph Rating
Score: 0, My vote: 0, Total votes: 0

EthicsCaseStudyForm edit

Title Read This, But Don’t Tell Anybody
Long Title Read This, But Don’t Tell Anybody
Contributor/Contact John Banja, PhD (jbanja@emory.edu)
Contributor Details John Banja, PhD
Director, Section on Ethics in Research
Atlanta Clinical and Translational Science Institute
Emory University
Atlanta, GA 30322
CTSA Emory
Case Study Provided Jane is a very motivated and bright graduate student who is trying hard to purify a protein in a highly specialized area of research. Despite her perseverance, she meets with failure after failure. Finally, she goes to her PI, Dr. Smith, who is an internationally recognized investigator in Jane’s area of research, and confesses her problem. The PI is silent for a while and then says, “Don’t fret. I’ll have something for you to look at tomorrow.” The following day when Jane arrives at the lab, she sees an unpublished manuscript on her desk with a post-it note from Dr. Smith that says: “Jane, read the methods and results sections of this paper. I think they might contain the solution to your problems. But don’t tell anybody I gave you this. As soon as you are finished, return the paper to me. And don’t make any copies of it.” The paper describes an experiment that seems exactly suited to solving Jane’s problem. Sure enough and within a few days, Jane has purified the protein using the approach. She gleefully reports all this to her PI and returns the paper. She can’t help asking though, “Dr. Smith, I have searched the literature high and low to find a method to help me with my project and found absolutely nothing. Where did you get that manuscript?” to which Dr. Smith obliquely replies, “Oh, I’ve got a ton of them.”
Scenario #1: The paper was written by a former student of Dr. Smith’s who was working in Dr. Smith’s lab at the time. The paper was never published nor was it ever submitted for publication.
Scenario #2: The paper is one that Dr. Smith was recently asked to review for a peer-reviewed publication or an NIH application. He hasn’t turned in his review yet.
Scenario #3: The paper has been accepted for publication and will appear soon.
Data Acquisition, Management, Sharing and Ownership Topics No Data acquisition_management_sharing and ownership Topics
Mentor and Trainee Responsibilities Topics
Definitions and expectations of the mentor and trainee relationship,
Addressing challenges and problems in the mentor–trainee relationship
Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship Topics No publication practices and responsible authorship topics
Peer Review Topics
Reviewer roles in ensuring RCR
Collaborative Science Topics No collaborative science topics
Research Misconduct Topics
Responding to observed misconduct
Conflicts of Interest, Law and Policy Topics
The significance of conflicts of interest
Human Subjects No human subjects

URL http://www.actsi.org/areas/erks/ethics/index.html
RCR Keyword Research Misconduct, Grant, Peer Review, Conflict of Interest, Mentoring
Other RCR Keywords Confidentiality; Experiment; Graduate Student; Intellectual Property; Methods and Results; Unknown Author
Type of Case

Source for Topic Areas Du Bois, J., & Dueker, J. (2009). Teaching and Assessing the Responsible Conduct of Research: A Delphi Consensus Panel Report. Journal of Research Administration, 40(1), 49-70.


Topic revision: r2 - 28 Oct 2011 - 12:46:58 - MaryBanach
Copyright &© by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding CTSPedia? Send feedback