Research Ethics and Practitioners: Concerns and Strategies for Novice Researchers Engaged in Graduate Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, practitioner research has gained prominence in academic literature and in graduate programs. This has led to increased attention to the ethical complexities of research that interconnects with professional practice. Many practitioner-researchers struggle to plan research that simultaneously satisfies their intellectual curiosity, the ethical standards of their professional practice, and their institutional research ethics boards. These struggles are particularly evident for new researchers, including those engaged in graduate study. In this paper, we identify ethical tensions for novice practitioner-researchers enrolled in a graduate research course. The paper is intended to contribute to conversations about teaching research ethics in graduate education. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs040263
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.425 | 0.363 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.045 | 0.107 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.051 | 0.048 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.048 |
| Research integrity | 0.043 | 0.046 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".