All persons engaged in research at the Laboratory are responsible for adhering to the highest standards of research integrity. Activities that fall short of the basic ethical principles inherent in the research process undermine the scientific enterprise. Our office is here to assist you in learning about responsible conduct of research and to address questions, concerns, and allegations of possible research misconduct. Under the Laboratory's research misconduct policy (RPM 2.05I) the Head of the Research and Institutional Integrity Office is the Research Integrity Officer and the Laboratory Deputy Director is the Deciding Official. This policy implements DOE Regulations (952.235-71) and Public Health Service Regulations (42 CFR Part 93) concerning Research Misconduct. The Laboratory policy on scientific and technical publications is found here.
- Meredith Montgomery, Research Integrity Officer, 510-486-4453, email@example.com
- Chris Byrne, Human Subjects and Animal Use Program Administrator, 510-486-5507, CEByrne@lbl.gov
- Elsie Quaite Randall, Chief Technology Transfer Officer, Innovation and Partnerships Office (IPO), 510-486-7234; EQuaiteRandall@lbl.gov
Responsible Conduct of Research
For-credit online training is available to Berkeley Lab employees through the CITI Program, described below. In person training is available to Berkeley Lab employees on a space-available basis through the UC Davis Office of Research and the UC Berkeley Extension. Contact us for assistance in enrolling in these programs. In addition, numerous reference materials are available online. A sampling is presented below.
On Being A Scientist. Third Edition.
Click here for the podcast.
|Howard Hughes Medical Institute. Making the Right Moves: A Practical Guide to Scientific Management for Postdocs and New Faculty (267 pages) Click here|
Department of Health and Human Services Office of Research Integrity (ORI)
Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI)
LBNL is a participating organization of the CITI Program, a service that provides research ethics education to members of the research community. CITI offers courses that satisfy certain Human Subject and Lab Animal training requirements, as well as a number of courses on an optional basis. There is a Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) course available that fulfills NSF RCR requirements for researchers and staff at any level. To register as a CITI user, you must select your institution or organization; choose "Other DOE” to affiliate yourself with LBNL. Maintain your proof of completion. .
Entering Mentoring - Howard Hughes Medical Institute - Click here.
What is mentoring?
Scientific mentoring is a personal, one-on-one relationship between a more experienced scientist and a junior scientist through which the trainee receives guidance and encouragement that contributes to professional development.
Why should you be a good mentor? Good mentoring should be viewed as an essential ingredient for ensuring that the postdoctoral-mentor relationship is professionally productive. Mentors also often mention deriving personal satisfaction in helping nurture the next generation of scientists.
Traits of a good mentor
- Accessiblity: An open door and an approachable attitude.
- Empathy: Personal insight into what the trainee is experiencing.
- Open mindedness: Respect for each trainee’s individuality and for working styles and career goals that may be different from those of the mentor.
- Consistency: Acting on your stated principles on a regular basis.
- Patience: Awareness that people make mistakes and that each person matures at his or her own rate.
- Honesty: Ability to communicate the hard truths about the trainee’s chances of success.
- Savviness: Attention to the pragmatic aspects of career development.
- Trust: As a mentor you are privy to considerable information about your trainee, including accomplishments, failures, financial situations and possibly even personal information. Information should be treated as confidential so your trainees feel they can trust you and share their ideas and problems with you.
Strategies for Effective Mentoring in your Lab
- Make everything a learning opportunity
- Set specific goals and measures of accomplishment
- Encourage strategic thinking and creativity
- Uphold professional standards
- Impart skills
- Provide networking opportunities
- Give moral support
Authorship and contributorship is determined by the research participants in accordance with department/division guidelines and society/journal publications rules, and funding acknowlegement and author affiliations are required. It is highly advised to discuss authorship expectations in advance; even then, the course of the research and participant roles and responsibilities can change over time. Different communitites of practice take different approaches. For example, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors has recommended the authorship criteria listed below. Click here for the ICMJE website.
- Authorship credit should be based on 1) substantial contributions to conception and design, acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data; 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) final approval of the version to be published. Authors should meet conditions 1, 2, and 3.
- When a large, multicenter group has conducted the work, the group should identify the individuals who accept direct responsibility for the manuscript (3). These individuals should fully meet the criteria for authorship/contributorship defined above, and editors will ask these individuals to complete journal-specific author and conflict-of-interest disclosure forms. When submitting a manuscript authored by a group, the corresponding author should clearly indicate the preferred citation and identify all individual authors as well as the group name. Journals generally list other members of the group in the Acknowledgments. The NLM indexes the group name and the names of individuals the group has identified as being directly responsible for the manuscript; it also lists the names of collaborators if they are listed in Acknowledgments.
- Acquisition of funding, collection of data, or general supervision of the research group alone does not constitute authorship.
- All persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship, and all those who qualify should be listed.
- Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for appropriate portions of the content.
Avoid research collaboration issues by discussing, in advance, overall goals, roles and responsibilities, and authorship/credit criteria for the collaboration.