EthicsProf. Toby WalshNICTA and UNSW

Ethics

Why? Why should you worry about ethics?

What? What should you worry about?

How? How do you decide what to do?

Why should you worry?

You’ll be found out …

It will have consequences ..

You may have to resign …

You may be fired …

You could end up in prison …

Your reputation is at stake ..

What should you worry about?

Research misconduct

Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results

Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Fact Sheet, October 14, 1999

Research misconduct

Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results Fabrication is making up results and

recording or reporting them

Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Fact Sheet, October 14, 1999

Research misconduct

Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results Falsification is manipulating research

materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record

Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Fact Sheet, October 14, 1999

Research misconduct

Fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results Plagiarism is the appropriation of

another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit, including those obtained through confidential review of others’ research proposals and manuscripts

Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, Fact Sheet, October 14, 1999

Beyond misconduct

Ilegal activities Money Drugs …

Human and animal ethics Computers don’t have rights Universities are quite good at

monitoring human and animal studies!

It impacts on a conference like IJCAI-11 …

Reviews discarded Conflicts of interest

Papers rejected Falsification

Even one of the Distinguished Papers raised problems!

And in one case, disciplinary action has been taken Your funding agency probably

requires you to take action …

IJCAI’s new conflict of interest policy

A potential conflict of interest exists when a person is involved in making a decision that could result in financial or professional gain (such as the selection of a paper for a conference) for that person, a close associate of that person or that person’s institution or company.

IJCAI’s new conflict of interest policy

A close associate is someone that is employed at the same institution or

company; advisor or current or recent graduate

student (within last 60 months); co-author within the last 48 months; investigator on the same grant or

research project; actively working on a project

together or on a similar topic; related by birth or marriage or

friendship; in deep personal animosity.

How do you decide what to do?

Actions

Consult Advisor Colleague Mentor Editor Program Chair University research office …

Actions

Protect yourself Keep records Record time stamps Get a witness Tread very carefully

Reputation at stake! Speak hypothetically

Actions

Communicate Danger of email Use the phone Visit in person Declare conflicts …

Actions

Trust your gut When you think you might need to

speak to a lawyer, it is already too late!

If you feel uncomfortable, it is time to act

You have responsibilities to act E.g. ARC requirements to report

Ethical speed bumps

Authorship

Citation

Reviewing

Experimentation

Authorship

See Judy’s talk

My advice Try to agree up front who is an

author and what is the order of authors

Some questions to consider: Would the paper exist without this

person? If the other authors fell sick, could

this person present the talk?

Authorship

See Judy’s talk

My advice When deciding the author order, try

to have one rule across all your papers However, your rule may conflict

with mine! Keep it simple

Mine: alphabetical order

Authorship

See Judy’s talk

My advice When deciding the author order, try

to have one rule across all your papers However, your rule may conflict

with mine! Keep it simple

Mine: alphabetical order Mine: otherwise I go last

Citation

See Judy’s talk

Credit where credit is due If we stand on the shoulders of

others, we should give them fair credit

We’re not in it for the money!

Citations only get more important Grants, tenure, …

Reviewing

Ethical minefield Material under review is strictly

confidential

Stakes are high Publish or perish People’s egos/livelihood is at stake

Anonymous Permits “bad” behaviours Role of author feedback!

First past the post Credit is only given to the 1st to publish

Reviewing

DO Declare conflicts & excuse yourself

where appropriate Treat all material in confidence Be objective (if you can’t, don’t review

this particular work) Be constructive

Think how your text will be received!

DON’T Review work where you have a conflict Wage vendettas, promote religions, … Now work on this problem (at least till

the work is published)

Experimentation

Recall, this is where 40% of scientific misconduct takes place!

Avoid the temptation to take shortcuts Nature will find you out There’s always a curve ball waiting

Remember 1% inspiration 99% perspiration

Experimentation

DO Keep good records (eg raw data) Look at the data Report enough detail to enable

replication Publish corrections promptly

DON’T Be selective

Cherry picking results! Obfuscate

Final words

Conclusions

Many ethical situations await you It’s only to be expected!

Take care Your reputation is your greatest

(only?) asset

Don’t worry Many others will have tread the

same road And can offer advice

Barcelona, I’m listening …