Reporting on Research: The Ethical Obligations of the Editor

Repor&ng on Research   The Ethical Obliga&ons of the Editor

Robin Sherman, Editorial & Design Services [email protected]

Agenda

5/25/11 Covering Research: Obliga&on of the Editor Robin Sherman Editorial & Design Services 2

  Ethical cornerstones

  Goal of research

  A few sta&s&cal basics   Sins of unethical repor&ng on research

  Example

  Components of a minimally good methodology explana&on

  What editors must do

  Resources

From ASBPE’s Guide To Preferred Editorial Prac&ces


Why do we need these guidelines?

Sec&on II. Standards for Editorial Opera&ons

D. Research

In the case of any research, rankings, “best of” or “worst of” awards, buyers’ guides or similar

editorial products, a neutral third party, such as a consulIng firm, may be used to help avoid

conflicts of interest. In any editorial content, a clear and complete discussion of the

methodology, including methodological and analy&cal limita&ons, should be published to

allow the reader to make informed judgments about the value of the content.

Sec&on III. Graphics and Photography

B. Charts and Graphics

Informa&on graphics should include an explana&on of research methodology and give the

source. This applies as well to graphics obtained from third parIes.

Ethical cornerstones


  Accuracy

  AMribu&on

  Context   Proper emphasis

  Transparency

Research goal


1) To whom do you want to generalize?

2) What popula&on can you get access to?

3) How can you get access to them?

4) Who is in your study?

1) The theore@cal popula@on

2) The study popula@on

3) The sampling frame

4) The sample, sub-‐sample

A few sta&s&cal basics


Sample size considera&ons

  Margin of error 5% is the commonly accepted choice. The margin of error is the amount of error that you can tolerate.

  Confidence level Typical choices are 90%, 95%, 99%. Measures the probability that you can project survey findings onto the enIre universe. s.

  Popula&on size How many people are there to choose your random sample from? The sample size doesn't change much for populaIons larger than 20,000.

  Survey Responses needed for 95% Confidence with ±5% Margin of Error

  Popula&on Size Responses Needed

10 10

  100 80

  200 132

  300 169

  400 197

  500 218

  600 235

  700 249

  800 260

  900 270

  1,000 278

  2,000 323

  5,000 357

  10,000 370

  20,000 377

  100,000 383

  1,000,000 384

The Raosoa Sample Size Calculator


hMp://raosoa.com/samplesize.html

A few sta&s&cal basics


  P (probability) value Less than .05 usually considered sta&s&cally significant

Sins of unethical repor&ng on research*


  1) Accentua&ng the posi&ve and ignoring the nega&ve

  2) Generalizing from anecdotes

  3) Not asking for the evidence   4) Wrong or insufficient interpreta&on of numbers

  5) Ignoring conflicts of interest

  6) Offering misleading results

  7) Ignoring the holis&c picture and failing to recognize the conclusions and weaknesses of scien&fic studies

  8) Ignoring the certainty of uncertainty in science

*Ethics in science journalism, George Claassen, University of Stellenbosch

Example — Poor sample size


Example — Exaggerated claims


Components of a minimally good methodology explana&on


  Invita&ons were emailed to 4,847 people on a list of ASBPE members and non-‐member business-‐to-‐business (B2B) editors. Between November 2 and December 10, 2009, 338 people answered the survey for a response rate of 7%.

  An ini&al screening ques&on eliminated 48 people who said they were not staff editors or writers for a business-‐to-‐business print or digital publica&ons. Among the 290 who indicated they were B2B staff editors or writers, 17 stopped answering the survey aaer the ini&al screening ques&on. The results are based on the 273 remaining B2B staff editors and writers.

  The 95% confidence level was used in this study. Results labeled as sta&s&cally significant have a 5% or less chance that they could be aMributed to sampling error (drawing a oddball sample).

  The survey ques&ons received between 203 and 269 non-‐missing responses (e.g. people who answered “don’t know” or lea a ques&on blank are missing responses).

  Percentages from these ques&ons have a margin of sampling error from ±6.0% (for ques&ons with 269 responses) to ±6.9% (for ques&ons with 203 responses). So using a ±7% margin of sampling error is safe for all ques&ons.

  This means that sampling error should cause no more than a 7% difference between the results in our study and the true value in the universe in 95% of samples.

  For example, our finding that 81% of B2B editors received a day or less of digital training in the past year has a 95% chance of falling in the interval between 74% (81% – 7%) and 88% (81% + 7%) in the universe from which the sample was drawn.

From Reynolds Na&onal Center for Business Journalism research Business Journalists study


  The informaIon contained in this report is based on 473 in-‐depth interviews with business journalists throughout the United States. Interviewing was conducted between April 19 and May 6, 2010, by professional interviewers at BRC’s state-‐of-‐the-‐art Computer-‐Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) facility in Phoenix. Interviewing was conducted under the direct supervision of BRC supervisory personnel, who randomly monitor interviews as they are conducted and who validate completed interviews. Prior to beginning the interviews, all interviewers were trained in all aspects of this job, including protocols for open-‐ended quesIons and sampling techniques.

  When reviewing the results from this survey, it should be kept in mind that all surveys are subject to sampling error. Sampling error, simply stated, is the difference between the results obtained from a sample and those that would be obtained by surveying the enIre universe under consideraIon. The overall sampling error for this survey is approximately +/-‐4.6 percent at a 95 percent confidence interval.

What editors must do (at minimum)


  Is sample random and adequate?

  Is confidence level adequate?

  Is margin of error is adequate?

  Is P value is adequate?

  Ask a 3rd party, independent sta&s&cian/researcher to review methodology.

  With your ar&cle about the research, include as much info about the methodology to give reader minimum way to judge validity.

  AND explain the above to your readers.


 Follow ASBPE guidelines.

 Don’t publish ar&cles about research with poor methodology.

 Don’t misinform your readers.

 Don’t sin.

Addi&onal resources


  American Cancer Society hMp://pubs.acs.org/userimages/ContentEditor/1218054468605/ethics.pdf

  Australian Press Council www.rjionline.org/media-‐accountability/code-‐of-‐ethics/ apc-‐guidelines-‐for-‐repor&ng

  American Educa&onal Research Associa&on www.aera.net/uploadedFiles/Publica&ons/Journals/Educa&onal_Researcher/ 3506/12ERv35n6_Standard4Report%20.pdf

  Blackwell Publishing hMp://www.blackwellpublishing.com/publica&onethics

  Survey SoJware Success, Jeffrey Henning, Founder & VP, Strategy, Vovici hMp://www.vovici.com/_assets/pdf/ebook/SurveySoawareSuccess.pdf

  Web Center for Social Research Methods hMp://www.socialresearchmethods.net

Repor&ng on Research   The Ethical Obliga&ons of the Editor

Robin Sherman, Editorial & Design Services [email protected]

Date post:	29-Nov-2014
Category:	News & Politics
Upload:	asbpe
View:	1,881 times
Download:	2 times

Reporting on Research: The Ethical Obligations of the Editor

News & Politics