Menu Close

CODE OF ETHICS AND PLAGIARISM.

This Code of Ethics and Ethical values in Research and Professional Conduct (the “Code”) serves as a code of professional conduct for Silicon City College faculty.
The major ethical issues in conducting research are: a) Informed consent, b) Beneficence- Do not harm c) Respect for anonymity and confidentiality d) Respect for privacy.
Each of these basic principles of research ethics is discussed in turn:
•PRINCIPLE ONE: Minimising the risk of harm.
•PRINCIPLE TWO: Obtaining informed consent.
•PRINCIPLE THREE: Protecting anonymity and confidentiality.
•PRINCIPLE FOUR: Avoiding deceptive practices.
•PRINCIPLE FIVE: Providing the right to withdraw.

Brief Explanation of all 5 Principles of research ethics
There are a number of ethical principles that should be taken into account when performing undergraduate and master's level dissertation research. At the core, these ethical principles stress the need to (a) do good (known as beneficence) and (b) do no harm (known as non-malfeasance).
In practice, these ethical principles mean that as a researcher, one need to: (a) obtain informed consent from potential research participants;
(b) minimise the risk of harm to participants;
(c) protect their anonymity and confidentiality;
(d) avoid using deceptive practices; and
(e) give participants the right to withdraw from your research.
The above Principles of Research is important not only for ethical reasons, but also practical ones, since a failure to meet such basic principles may lead to one’s research being (a) criticised, potentially leading to a lower mark, and/or
(b) rejected by the supervisor or Ethics Committee, costing one’s valuable time. Protecting the anonymity and confidentiality of research participants is another practical component of research ethics. Participants will typically only be willing to volunteer information, especially information of a private or sensitive nature, if the researcher agrees to hold such information in confidence. Whilst it is possible that research participants may be hurt in some way if the data collection methods used are somehow insensitive, there is perhaps a greater danger that harm can be caused once data has been collected. This occurs when data is not treated confidentially, whether in terms of the storage of data, its analysis, or during the publication process (i.e., when submitting your dissertation to be marked). However, this does not mean that all data collected from research participants needs to be kept confidential or anonymous.
It may be possible to disclose the identity and views of individuals at various stages of the research process (from data collection through to publication of your dissertation). Nonetheless, permissions should be sought before such confidential information is disclosed.
An alternative is to remove identifiers (e.g., vernacular terms, names, geographical cues, etc.) or provide proxies when writing up. However, such a stripping of identifiable information may not always be possible to anticipate at the outset of your dissertation when thinking about issues of research ethics. This is not only a consideration for dissertations following a qualitative research design, but also a quantitative research design .

Deception is sometimes a necessary component of covert research, which can be justified in some cases. Covert researchreflects research where (a) the identity of the observer and/or
(b) the purpose of the research is not known to participants. Cases where you may choose to engage in covert research may include instances where:
It is not feasible to let everyone in a particular research setting know what you are doing.
Overt observation or knowledge of the purpose of the research may alter the particular phenomenon that is being studied.
Let's take each of these in turn:
It is not feasible to let everyone in a particular research setting know what you are doing
By feasibility, we are not talking about the cost of doing research. Instead, we mean that it is not practically possible to let everyone in a particular research setting know what you are doing. This is most likely to be the case where research involves observation, rather than direct contact with participants, especially in a public or online setting. There are a number of obvious instances where this may be the case:
Observing what users are doing in an Internet chat room.
Observing individuals going about their business (e.g., shopping, going to work, etc.).
Imagine some of the following scenarios where covert research may be considered justifiable:

Scenario A
You are conducting a piece of research looking at prejudice. Whilst participants are given a questionnaire to complete that measures their prejudice, it is not obvious from the questions that this is the case. Furthermore, participants are not told that the research is about prejudice because it is felt that this could alter their responses. After all, few people would be happy if other people thought they were prejudice. As a result, if participants knew that this is the purpose of the study, they may well provide responses that they think will make them appear less prejudice.

Scenario B
You are interested in understanding the organisational culture in a single firm. You feel that observation would be an appropriate research method in such a naturalistic setting. However, you feel that if employees knew that you were monitoring them, they may behave in a different way. Therefore, you may have received permission to go undercover or provide a story to explain why you are there, which is not the truth.
Whilst such covert research and deceptive practices, especially where used intentionally, can be viewed as controversial, it can be argued that they have a place in research.
Research Ethics is an integral part of graduate research. STATEMENTS, FIGURES AND TABLES Reproduced in a Report, Presentation and/or Paper require proper citation. Published work is protected by Copyright Law Copyright permission is necessary if you are reproducing your work in another publication (This applies even if it is one’s own work).
Research Misconduct Research misconduct means Fabrication, Falsification, or Plagiarism (FFP) in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results.
(a) Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them.
(b) Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record. (c) Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.
(d) Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.
It is the responsibility of the author to ensure that the submitted manuscript is original and shall not contain plagiarized material. Plagiarism is passing off another person’s work as one’s own, i.e., reusing text, results, or creative expression without explicitly acknowledging or referencing the original author or publication. Authors should be aware this includes self-plagiarism, defined as the reuse of significant portions of the author’s own published work or works, without attribution to the original source.
Examples of plagiarism include verbatim copying of published articles; verbatim copying of elements of published articles (e.g., figures, illustrations, tables); verbatim copying of elements of published articles with crediting, but not clearly differentiating original work from previously published work; and self-plagiarism. It is the responsibility of the author to obtain proper permission and to appropriately cite or quote the material not original to the author. In this context, “quote” is defined as reusing other works with proper acknowledgement. Appropriate citation applies whether the material was written by another author or the author him or herself.

Other Types of Ethical Violations
• Duplicate publication/submission of research findings; failure to inform the editor of related papers that the author has under consideration or “in press”
• Unrevealed conflicts of interest that could affect the interpretation of the findings
• Misrepresentation of research findings - use of selective or fraudulent data to support a hypothesis or claim-all of these should be avoided.