THURSDAY RESEARCH IN DAILY LIFE 1

22023, MAY 18

Ethical
Standards in
Writing
Related
Literature
MELC

MELC:
The learner follows ethical standards in writing related literature. (CS_RS11-
IIIf-j-5)
The learner presents written review of literature. (CS_RS11- IIIf-j-6)

Objectives:

1. Give the importance of ethics in research.

2. Explain the ethical standards in writing related literature.
3. presents written review of literature.
• Why do you need to review literature?

a. To avoid academic dishonesty-

Academic dishonesty is “the theft

or stealing of ideas and other forms
of intellectual property” (Sandy,
1999, p. 75).

3
Examples of Academic Dishonesty:

1. Plagiarism - is an act of claiming

another’s work or copying a portion of
someone else’s writing. If copying
another researcher’s ideas cannot be
avoided, proper citation must be done.
2. Self-plagiarism - is defined when
the researchers reuse their own work
or data in a ‘new’ written product
without letting the readers know that
the manuscript already appeared in
4
another literature.
Examples of Academic Dishonesty:

3. Fabrication- The falsification of

data, information, or citations
(Simmons, 1999). Creating false facts
or citations to create “artificial
acknowledgement”.

4. Cheating - Any attempt to give or

obtain assistance in a formal academic
exercise such as exam or “hiring”
others to complete your assignments
(Simmons, 1999).
 • Why do you need to review literature?

b. To see what has and has not been

investigated.

c. To identify data sources that other

researchers have used.

d. To learn how others have defined and

measured key concepts.
 • Why do you need to review literature?

e. To develop alternative research projects.

f. To put your work in perspective.

g. To contribute to the field by moving

research forward. Reviewing the literature
lets you see what came before, and what did
and didn't work for other researchers.
 • Why do you need to review literature?

h. To demonstrate your understanding, and

your ability to critically evaluate research in
the field.

i. To provide evidence that may be used to

support your own findings.
Ethical Codes
and Policies for
Research
Data should never be fabricated, falsified,
or misrepresented.
Promises and agreements should be kept
and all actions should be made with a
sincere purpose.
Careless errors and negligence should be
avoided.
 The researcher should be open to
criticisms and new ideas. Research data,
results, ideas, and resources should also
be shared with the public.
Proper acknowledgement should be given
to all authors cited and sources used in
your research.
Confidential communications or
documents should be protected.
 The study should be done with the
purpose of advancing research and
scholarship. Wasteful and duplicate
publication should be avoided.
Researcher should know and obey relevant
laws, and institutional and government
policies.
Harms and risks to human lives should be
minimized. Human dignity, privacy, and
autonomy should be among the primary
considerations of the research.
 concentrate on four foci:
research theories - theories helps in looking at the relationships between the
variables and concepts being studied with than of the present ones
methods- methods help in finding the best methodology and the variables
looked into
outcomes- outcomes help in identifying the gaps of information
practices and applications- application and practices is more on the
implication of the findings to policy, people, knowledge, education, etc.
useful in integrating, resolving, bridging, and generalizing the theories and
concepts under study. Explicate the arguments
looks on how wide the study must be by looking at sample /population
(central and representative), how exhaustive the sampling was and how they
were selected
always consider that your research work is intended to fellow researchers,
academicians and professionals, thus avoid writing it for general public or for
laymen.
What are the areas of major disagreement,
controversy or debate?
Which argument is more persuasive and why?
Which approach, finding or methodology seem the
most reliable, valid or appropriate and why?
Which argument is more persuasive and why?
Which approach, finding or methodology seem the
most reliable, valid or appropriate and why?
Example:

This part of Literature Review was lifted from:

Labay, P.M. (2005). The social history of a hobby that

turned into a livelihood strategy: The case of butterfly
livelihood in rural Philippines (Master’s thesis:
Wageningen University & Research Centrum, The
Netherlands).