Case Study 02: The Selection of Data

Kaori, a third-year graduate student, and Sayaka, a postdoctoral fellow, have made a series of measurements on a new experimental semiconductor material using an expensive neutron test at a national laboratory. When they return to their own laboratory and examine the data, a newly proposed mathematical explanation of the semiconductor’s behavior predicts results indicated by a curve.

During the measurements at the national laboratory, Kaori and Sayaka observed electrical power fluctuations that they could not control or predict were affecting their detector. They suspect the fluctuations affected some of their measurements, but they don’t know which ones.

When Kaori and Sayaka begin to write up their results to present at a lab meeting, which they know will be the first step in preparing a publication, Sayaka suggests dropping two anomalous data points near the horizontal axis from the graph they are preparing. She[Sayaka] says that due to their deviation from the theoretical curve, the low data points were obviously caused by the power fluctuations. Furthermore, the deviations were outside the expected error bars calculated for the remaining data points.

Kaori is concerned that dropping the two points could be seen as manipulating the data. Kaori and Sayaka could not be sure that any of their data points, if any, were affected by the power fluctuations. They also did not know if the theoretical prediction was valid. She wants to do a separate analysis that includes the points and discuss the issue in the lab meeting. But Sayaka says that if they include the data points in their talk, others will think the issue important enough to discuss in a draft paper, which will make it harder to get the paper published. Instead, she(Sayaka) and Kaori should use their professional judgment to drop the points now.

1. What factors should Sayaka and Kaori take into account in deciding how to present the data from their experiment?

2. Should the new explanation predicting the results affect their deliberations?

3. Should a draft paper be prepared at this point?

4. If Kaori and Sayaka can’t agree on how the data should be presented, should one of them consider not being an author of the paper?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Japanese edition02 Research_Ethics02.html

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Notes: This case example is cited and codified from "US National Academy of Sciences, On Being a Scientist: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in Research: Third Edition, 2009."

2020 Ethics for Academic Research (in English)

Example of Labo-Notes, Laboratory Notes, from Scientific integrity : text and cases in responsible conduct of research  / Francis L. Macrina, ASM , 2014