Detail Cantuman

1. Validation and Use of a Predictive Modeling Tool Employing Scientific Findings to Improve Responsible Conduct of Research Education
Tyler J. Mulhearn, M.S.a, Logan L. Watts, Ph.D. a, E. Michelle Todd, B.S., Kelsey E. Medeiros, Ph.D.b, Shane Connelly, Ph.D.a, and Michael D. Mumford, Ph.D.a
aDepartment of Psychology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, USA; bDepartment of Psychology, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, Texas, USA
ABSTRACT
Although recent evidence suggests ethics education can be effective, the nature of specific training programs, and their effectiveness, varies considerably. Building on a recent path modeling effort, the present
study developed and validated a predictive modeling tool for responsible conduct of research education. The predictive modeling tool allows users to enter ratings in relation to a given ethics training program
and receive instantaneous evaluative information for course refinement. Validation work suggests the tool’s predicted outcomes correlate strongly (r = 0.46) with objective course outcomes. Implications for
training program development and refinement are discussed.
KEYWORDS
Education; ethics; evaluation; path model; RCR; responsible conduct of research; tool; training

2. Cross-Field Comparison of Ethics Education: Golden Rules and Particulars
Tyler J. Mulhearn, M.S., Logan L. Watts, Ph.D. , Brett S. Torrence, M.S., E. Michelle Todd, B.S., Megan R. Turner, B.S., Shane Connelly, Ph.D., and Michael D. Mumford, Ph.D.
Department of Psychology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, USA
ABSTRACT
Research misconduct negatively impacts the scientific community and society in general. Providing training in the responsible conduct of research (RCR) to researchers is one viable approach to minimizing
research misconduct. Although recent evidence suggests ethics training can indeed be effective, little empirical work has examined the similarities and differences across fields. In the present study, we
analyzed 62 empirical studies in engineering, biomedical science, social science, and mixed fields. The findings suggest certain instructional principles, or “golden rules,” apply generally to all fields. These golden
rules include maintaining a field-specific or field-general approach and emphasizing processes in training. The findings also suggest that content areas contributing to instructional effectiveness vary as a
function of field. Generally, it appears that all fields may benefit from taking a multi-pronged approach to ethics education wherein the salient field issues are covered. Implications for RCR education are
discussed.
KEYWORDS
Cross field; ethics education; ethics training; field differences; responsible conduct of research