Week Three Discussion Replies. Reply To The Two Students Post. Min 50 Words Each

Respond to at least 2 of your classmates. Responses should be approximately 50 words each.

Darryl Alarcon (students name)

Discussion 3

Ethical Dilemna

1. A prisoner you are interviewing tells you about a potential breakout at the prison that night. What do you do?

a. In this situation, it is best to avoid collecting harmful information (Creswell, 2023). Unless specifically disclosed by the setting like a school or prison, this information should be protected for all participants. It is also hard to determine how impactful the information is and can potentially impact the study.

2. a researcher on your team copies sentences from another study and incorporates them into the final written report for your project. What do you do?

a. Researcher must not duplicate or piecemeal publications (Creswell, 2023). The researcher must inform that duplication or piecemealing publications is not allowed and if similarities were intended must be disclosed to biomedical journals that the published paper is closely related. The other members of the team should also be informed to negotiate how the rest of the study should continue.

3. A student collects data for a project from several individuals interviewed in families in your city. After the fourth interview, the student tells you that approval has not been received for the project from the IRB. What will you do?

a. The data collected is invalid because data must be first obtained then the interview can occur (Creswell, 2023). This process is necessary because potential risks must be assessed, and informed consent forms must be signed. There may be modifications to your study that may be requested from the IRB.

 

Reference:

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). 
Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications, Inc. 

 

Inas Cateriano (students name)

In addressing the ethical dilemma of plagiarism within a research proposal, one can explicitly outline a comprehensive plan to uphold academic integrity. Firstly, the proposal should emphasize the importance of proper citation and attribution, making it clear that all sources will be diligently acknowledged. One of the most frequently recommended instructional approaches is citation, which is explicitly highlighted as the central focus of the investigation. It stands out as a distinctive characteristic of academic writing and has been a topic of interest among scholars in employee assistance programs (EAP) (Fazilatfar et al., 2018). Shi (2008) highlighted the significance of citation, emphasizing that referencing a source text involves more than just including a name and a date; it is a subjective process through which the author decides how to generate new meanings from existing resources. The primary function of citation in English for specific purposes (ESP) is acknowledged to be both the recognition of others’ contributions and the endorsement and validation of the author’s knowledge assertions (Shi, 2008). Secondly, the proposal could include a section on research ethics, outlining the consequences of academic misconduct and the researcher’s commitment to maintaining the highest standards of integrity throughout the project. For example, in the article “Plagiarism, Cheating and Research Integrity: Case Studies from a Master’s Program in Peru,” the authors clearly took their time to make room for an ethics declaration portion. They emphasized ethical considerations in research, specifically in “Ethics Declarations” and “Conflict of Interest.” Authors declare financial support and teaching positions, affirming no other influencing relationships. A disclaimer clarifies the views expressed as the authors’ own, not official government policy. The copyright statement details legal aspects, emphasizing transparency and adherence to ethical standards in research and publishing (Carnero et al., 2017). Additionally, the proposal might propose regular training sessions for the research team on responsible conduct of research, including plagiarism awareness and avoidance strategies. These measures not only serve as preventive measures but also demonstrate the researcher’s commitment to ethical conduct.

 

References

Carnero, A. M., Mayta-Tristan, P., Konda, K. A., Mezones-Holguin, E., Bernabe-Ortiz, A., Alvarado, G. F., … & Lescano, A. G. (2017). Plagiarism, cheating and research integrity: Case studies from a masters program in Peru. 
Science and Engineering Ethics, 23, 1183-1197.

Fazilatfar, A. M., Elhambakhsh, S. E., & Allami, H. (2018). An investigation of the effects of citation instruction to avoid plagiarism in EFL academic writing assignments. 
Sage open, 8(2), 2158244018769958.

Shi L. (2008). Textual appropriation and citing behaviors of university undergraduates. Applied Linguistics, 31, 1-24.s