10

Research II
Quarter 2 – Module 4:
Research Ethics and Protocols
Research II – Grade 10 STE
Alternative Delivery Mode
Quarter 2 – Module 2: Research Ethics and Protocols
First Edition, 2020

Republic Act 8293, section 176 states that: No copyright shall subsist in any work of
the Government of the Philippines. However, prior approval of the government agency or office
wherein the work is created shall be necessary for exploitation of such work for profit. Such
agency or office may, among other things, impose as a condition the payment of royalties.

Borrowed materials (i.e., songs, stories, poems, pictures, photos, brand names,
trademarks, etc.) included in this module are owned by their respective copyright holders.
Every effort has been exerted to locate and seek permission to use these materials from their
respective copyright owners. The publisher and authors do not represent nor claim ownership
over them.

Published by the Department of Education

Secretary: Leonor Magtolis Briones
Undersecretary: Diosdado M. San Antonio

JUNIOR HS MODULE DEVELOPMENT TEAM

Author : Josephine G. Nacar

Co-Author - Content Editor : Charies N. Pena
Co-Author - Language Reviewer : Charies N. Pena
Co-Author - Illustrator : Nathaniel Sebastian
Co-Author - Layout Artist : Nathaniel Sebastian
Co-Author - Team Leader : Loreta S. Manabat

DIVISION MANANGEMENT TEAM:

Schools Division Superintendent : Romeo M. Alip, PhD, CESO V
Asst. Schools Division Superintendent : William Roderick R. Fallorin, CESE
Chief Education Supervisor, CID : Milagros M. Peñaflor, PhD
Education Program Supervisor, LRMDS : Edgar E. Garcia, MITE
Education Program Supervisor, AP/ADM : Romeo M. Layug
Education Program Supervisor, Learning Area : Edwin Riel Bermillo
Project Development Officer II, LRMDS : Joan T. Briz
Division Librarian II, LRMDS : Rosita P. Serrano
Book Designer : Emmanuel S. Gimena Jr.

Printed in the Philippines by Department of Education – Schools Division of Bataan

Office Address: Provincial Capitol Compound, Balanga City, Bataan
Telefax: (047) 237-2102
E-mail Address: bataan@deped.gov.ph
 10

Research II
Quarter 2 – Module 4:
Research Ethics and Protocols
Introductory Message
For the facilitator:

Welcome to the Research II – Grade 10 STE Alternative Delivery Mode (ADM) Module
on Research Ethics and Principles!

This module was collaboratively designed, developed and reviewed by educators both
from public and private institutions to assist you, the teacher or facilitator in helping
the learners meet the standards set by the K to 12 Curriculum while overcoming
their personal, social, and economic constraints in schooling.

This learning resource hopes to engage the learners into guided and independent
learning activities at their own pace and time. Furthermore, this also aims to help
learners acquire the needed 21st century skills while taking into consideration their
needs and circumstances.

In addition to the material in the main text, you will also see this box in the body of
the module:

Notes to the Teacher

This contains helpful tips or strategies that
will help you in guiding the learners.

ii
As a facilitator you are expected to orient the learners on how to use this module.
You also need to keep track of the learners' progress while allowing them to manage
their own learning. Furthermore, you are expected to encourage and assist the
learners as they do the tasks included in the module.

For the learner:

Welcome to the Research II – Grade 10 STE Alternative Delivery Mode (ADM) Module
on Research Ethics and Protocols!

The hand is one of the most symbolized part of the human body. It is often used to
depict skill, action and purpose. Through our hands we may learn, create and
accomplish. Hence, the hand in this learning resource signifies that you as a learner
is capable and empowered to successfully achieve the relevant competencies and
skills at your own pace and time. Your academic success lies in your own hands!

This module was designed to provide you with fun and meaningful opportunities for
guided and independent learning at your own pace and time. You will be enabled to
process the contents of the learning resource while being an active learner.

This module has the following parts and corresponding icons:

What I Need to Know This will give you an idea of the skills or
competencies you are expected to learn in the
module.

What I Know This part includes an activity that aims to

check what you already know about the
lesson to take. If you get all the answers
correct (100%), you may decide to skip this
module.

What’s In This is a brief drill or review to help you link

the current lesson with the previous one.

What’s New In this portion, the new lesson will be

introduced to you in various ways such as a
story, a song, a poem, a problem opener, an
activity or a situation.

What is It This section provides a brief discussion of the

lesson. This aims to help you discover and
understand new concepts and skills.

What’s More This comprises activities for independent

practice to solidify your understanding and
skills of the topic. You may check the
answers to the exercises using the Answer
Key at the end of the module.

iii
 What I Have Learned This includes questions or blank
sentence/paragraph to be filled in to process
what you learned from the lesson.

What I Can Do This section provides an activity which will

help you transfer your new knowledge or skill
into real life situations or concerns.

Assessment This is a task which aims to evaluate your

level of mastery in achieving the learning
competency.

Additional Activities In this portion, another activity will be given

to you to enrich your knowledge or skill of the
lesson learned. This also tends retention of
learned concepts.

Answer Key This contains answers to all activities in the

module.

At the end of this module you will also find:

References This is a list of all sources used in developing

this module.

The following are some reminders in using this module:

1. Use the module with care. Do not put unnecessary mark/s on any part of the
module. Use a separate sheet of paper in answering the exercises.
2. Don’t forget to answer What I Know before moving on to the other activities
included in the module.
3. Read the instruction carefully before doing each task.
4. Observe honesty and integrity in doing the tasks and checking your answers.
5. Finish the task at hand before proceeding to the next.
6. Return this module to your teacher/facilitator once you are through with it.
If you encounter any difficulty in answering the tasks in this module, do not
hesitate to consult your teacher or facilitator. Always bear in mind that you are
not alone.

We hope that through this material, you will experience meaningful learning and
gain deep understanding of the relevant competencies. You can do it!

iv
 What I Need to Know

In this module, the students will be able to identify and understand some ethical
principles (libguides. library,2020): to help researchers steer clear of ethical
quandaries (Smith 2003).

At the end of this chapter, you should be able to:

1. enumerate some Research misconducts.

What I Know
Pre-assessment

Answer the table by checking the statement which corresponds to Science

Misconduct.

Scientific Misconduct Yes No

1.Scientific misconduct is defined as "the violation of the

standard codes of scholarly conduct and ethical behavior in
professional scientific research".

2. Conducting a research is important because it provides huge

information whether in revised or novel in form.

3. Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or

reporting them.
4. Falsification is the changing or omission of research results
(data) to support claims, hypotheses, other data, etc.
5. Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas,
processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.

5
 Lesson
Scientific Misconduct
4
Scientific misconduct is defined as "the violation of the standard codes of scholarly
conduct and ethical behavior in professional scientific research".

As a general guide, the term “research misconduct” applies to any action that
involves mistreatment of research subjects or purposeful manipulation of the
scientific record such that it no longer reflects observed truth. (Laine 2009)
(Snyder & Goodell,2012)

In this lesson, we will be discussing the known Research misconduct in proposing,

performing, reviewing or in reporting research results.

6
 What’s In
Review

Just to have a short review of the past lesson, kindly fill up the box with the different
Ethics principles and considerations when conducting a Research. No exact order is
required in filling up the boxes.

Notes to the Teacher

This module is prepared to give the students an information about
research misconduct. This module is hopeful to provide guidance
to the young researchers when performing their research.

7
 What’s New
Just saying…..

I want your honest opinion with regards to the following

questions. You may answer this as briefly as you can.

1. I would like to know your concept of a research. Why do

you think people are engaging themselves in doing a
research? As researchers, what do we wanted to emphasize
when we got the results of the study? What fulfillment will it
bring once evaluators failed to reject your hypothesis?

2. what do you think will happen if your Science Investigatory

project has nothing, but a copy pastes from different researches? Will it produce
allegations? Why or why not?

What Is It
Conducting a research is important because it provides huge information whether
in revised or novel in form. It gives hope for the sick and progress in industry. For
millions of reasons, conducting a research should be considered revered, therefore must
comply, the ethical norms and principles. However, this is normally untrue. There were
some, for whatever purpose undergone research misconduct. Now for you to avoid it, let
us discuss those actions considered misconduct in doing a research.

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing,

performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.

8
The Office of Research Integrity, U.S. Department of Health & Human Services define
research misconducts such as the following:

(a) Fabrication - making up data or results and

recording or reporting them.

(b) Falsification - manipulating research

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

(c) Plagiarism - the appropriation of another person's

ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit. 1

According to the U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy, to be considered as a research misconduct,
actions must represent a “significant departure from accepted practices,” must have been “committed
intentionally, or knowingly, or recklessly,” and must be “proven by a preponderance of evidence.”
According to the statement, “research misconduct does not include differences of opinion.” 2

To further explain

Falsification
Falsification is the changing or omission of research results (data) to support claims,
hypotheses, other data, etc. Falsification can include the manipulation of research
instrumentation, materials, or processes. Manipulation of images or representations in
a manner that distorts the data or “reads too much between the lines” can also be
considered falsification.

Fabrication
Fabrication is the construction and/or addition of data, observations, or
characterizations that never occurred in the gathering of data or running of
experiments. Fabrication can occur when “filling out” the rest of experiment runs.
Claims about results need to be made on complete data sets (as is normally assumed),
where claims made based on incomplete or assumed results is a form of fabrication.

9
Plagiarism

Plagiarism is, perhaps, the most common form of research misconduct.

Researchers must be aware to cite all sources and take careful notes. Using or
representing the work of others as your own work constitutes plagiarism, even if
committed unintentionally. When reviewing privileged information, such as when
reviewing grants or journal article manuscripts for peer review, researchers must
recognize that what they are reading cannot be used for their own purposes because it
cannot be cited until the work is published or publicly available.

“Cases of misconduct in science involving fabrication, falsification, and

plagiarism breach the trust that allows scientists to build on others’ work, as well as
eroding the trust that allows policymakers and others to make decisions based on
scientific and objective evidence. The inability or refusal of research institutions to
address such cases can undermine both the integrity of the research process and self-
governance by the research community.”
(Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process, 1992.) _

Eilisbik, (2019) in her blog posted on their website, the Office of Research
Integrity (ORI), part of the USA Department of Health and Human Services, the series
of discussions about Research misconduct. The Part 1 is about plagiarism. According
to Eilisbik, scientific papers should be original and unique – that is what moves science forward.
She stated: Plagiarism is defined as re-using someone else’s words, ideas, or results.
Although this might sound clear at first glance, there is a huge grey zone. It is easy to
scan for textual similarities, but it is much harder to prove that ideas have been reused.
Text similarities in scientific papers are easy to detect.

Eilisbik noted the following on her discussion that seems important for you to take
note:

1. Some short text similarities are OK

A little bit of textual plagiarism is acceptable – if it is limited to a couple of

sentences, not a whole paragraph. By definition, a definition will be identical to text in
many older papers, and this is totally acceptable the following definitions will not be
considered plagiarism. However, write- in- text citation when possible. Some
textual similarities in the Methods are also totally fine, again, as it is limited to small
blocks of text, not the complete Methods section. Some “stolen” sentences in the
Introduction of a research paper, as long as the data is novel, is obviously less
worrisome than copy/pasting the complete introduction or the data from someone
else’s papers

10
2. Large text similarities are not OK.

Stealing someone else’s text is considered science misconduct, not flattery,

when we are talking about large chunks of text. If you are going to use a sentence or a
large block written by another researcher, you can do that if you use quotation marks
and a clear attribution (a citation to the source).

3.How to properly re-use someone else’s text

If you are going to use a sentence or a large block written by another

researcher, you can do that if you use quotation marks and a clear attribution (a
citation to the source).

4. Text recycling

This is the re-use of text you have written yourself, “text recycling” This is
sometimes called “self-plagiarism”, although this is not plagiarism according to the
ORI definition, because it does not involve re-using someone else’s text.

Text recycling is one of those grey zones where it is hard to draw a clear line.
Publishing the exact same paper twice is not allowed by most journals, because science
papers need to be original and not submitted somewhere else. On the other hand, a
couple of lines in the introduction taken from a previous paper by the same author is
acceptable, again, as long as it is not a complete paragraph.

5. Data or figure plagiarism

This is copying data or figures from a paper written by someone else.

6. Other forms of plagiarism

Plagiarism that does not involve exact textual or number similarities is even
harder to define, when it is about copying someone’s ideas.

One form of plagiarism that is not OK is for peer-reviewers to steal ideas from a
manuscript they are reviewing. If you do a peer-review of a paper, you accept the
agreement that you cannot use the ideas of the paper for your own benefit. There have
unfortunately been some cases (Retraction Watch, December 2016, May
2017, February 2019) where a researcher’s manuscript got rejected, but was
published later – by a different group.

11
Now let us look at the second type of misconduct: The Falsification; and the third
type of misconduct: The Fabrication

Eilisbik, (2019) noted on her blog discussion that “Falsification” and

“Fabrication” are not always easy to distinguish. Fabrication is making up data, so
reporting on experiments that never happened or patients that never existed. While
Falsification is different in that an experiment might have taken place, but that some
measurements were altered. Although the definitions appear to be very different, the
reuse of an image to represent two different experiments could be interpreted as either
falsification (changing data) or as fabrication (making up data).

In additional to that, Eilisbik, (2019) said in her blog that in falsification,

experimental measurements might have been altered so that research is not accurately
represented. And Fabrication is making up data, so reporting on experiments that never
happened or patients that never existed. And many cases of falsification could be
interpreted as fabrication as well.

What’s More
After our discussion I am going to cite examples and classify whether it is a case of

Plagiarism, Falsification or Fabrication. Draw the following icons to represent your

answer:

Plagiarism Falsification Fabrication

_____1. Removing an outlier from a series of measurements

_____2. Changing a measurement to make it look higher or lower

12
_____3. Presenting data as if derived from cell line A while it was obtained from cell line
B

____4. An immunoblot obtained with antibody A in Figure 1 looks extremely similar to

an immunoblot obtained with antibody B in Figure 2.

____5. A case where Old Paper 1 shows a bunch of experiments and figures, and New
Paper 2 from a different research groups show exactly the same
measurements and figures

What I Have Learned

From your thoughts:

1. When does a paper considered plagiarized?

2. Why does “showing two overlapping microscopy images to represent 2 different

experiments” considered falsification?

3. How does a data result without actual testing is considered as fabrication?

13
 What I Can Do

Fill in the Blanks: Fill the blank with the correct answer.

___1___ is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results,or words

without giving appropriate credit, while _____2____ manipulate research materials or

changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented

in the research record. Thus, it usually results to ______3____ that is making up data or

results and recording or reporting them.

Assessment
Analyze the situation given below and discuss what can you say about the work of the
student researcher in relation to scientific misconduct.

 A student researcher wants to meet his deadline of submission. However, in his

result, it shows that it is not congruent with his expectation and there is a tendency
that the result will reject his hypothesis. He wanted to repeat his experiment, but time
did not permit him. Instead of repeating his experiment, what he did was to search
online some projects similar to his. He chooses a good introductory paragraph without
mentioning the original author of the paper. And to make his paper looks successfully
done, he changes some data so that it will provide a result according to his
expectation. To do that perfectly, he added some data which was not actually
performed during the experiment thus at the end, he was able to submit a very good
paper and meets the deadline as well.

14
 Additional Activities

Give at least one example of each type of scientific misconduct that was published on

journal. Do not forget to cite your references.

Call your friend Mr. Google if you wish….

15
 16
What I Can Do
What I Know
The student researcher makes a perfect crime of
1. yes 2. yes Scientific Research Misconduct such as
1. Plagiarism
3. yes 4. yes
2. Falsification
5. yes 3. Fabrication
What’s More What’s I Have What I Can Do
Learned
1. Plagiarism
1. 1 A paper is plagiarized 2. Falsification
when you copy some 3. Fabrication
phrases or paragraph
2.
without giving proper
acknowledgment.
3. 2. an experiment took
place, but one of these
4. experiments is made to
look like another
experiment, making it
5. or falsification.
3.Because the experiment
never took place.
What’s In What’s New What’s New
1. As Researcher, I would 2. It is better not to
1. Discuss intellectual like to discover something conduct research at all. It
property frankly new or provide some will only produce
2. Be conscious of innovations. allegations due to several
multiple roles ethical misconduct.
3. Follow informed- I wanted to get a result
consent rules which shows that there is
4. Respect no significant difference
confidentiality and between my result and
privacy with the established one.
5. Tap into ethics
resources It provides a fulfilled
6 Protection of animals feeling was the evaluator
used in research failed to reject your
hypothesis
Answer Key
References

Elisabeth Bik What is Research Misconduct? Part 1: Plagiarism, A blog about science
integrity, May 28,2019

Elisabeth Bik What is Research Misconduct? Part 2: Falsification, A blog about science
integrity, May 28,2019

Elisabeth Bik What is Research Misconduct? Part 3: Fabrication, A blog about science
integrity, May 28,2019

Erich W. Schienke, Ph.D. 2.1 Falsification, Fabrication, Plagiarism Part 2 Research

Integrity. The BIOET 533: Ethical Dimensions of Renewable Energy and
Sustainability Systems, Penn State’s College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, OER
Initiative

https://www.e-education.psu.edu/bioet533/node/654

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/

https://explorable.com/scientific-misconduct

https://ori.hhs.gov/definition-misconduct

https://www.councilscienceeditors.org/resource-library/editorial-policies/white-
paper-on-publication-ethics/3-1-description-of-research-misconduct/

On Being a Scientist: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in Research: Third

Edition.Copyright 2009 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Bookshelf ID: NBK21456
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK214564/2

Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process. Vol. 1:20, NAS,
1992.

Scienceintegritydigest.com/2019/05/28/what-is-research-misconduct-part-1-
plagiarism/

17