John von Neumann Institute, Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City

Scientific Research Method:

Techniques, Models and Practices
Part II: From Ideas to Research Topics
Prof. Dr. Vu Duong
Director & Chair of Systems Science
John von Neumann Institute, Vietnam National University HCM
2
Contents
o Searching a research problem,
o Bibliographic Search and Literature Review,
o Tutorial on How to Read a Scientific Paper
o Research Plan: Goals and Elements,
o Defining a Research Hypothesis,
o Planning and Methodology,
o Estimating Feasibility of an Investigation,
3
First Step
The difference between a trivial project and
a significant project
is not the amount of work required to carry it out,
but the amount of thought that you apply
in the selection and definition of your problem.
David P. Beach & Torsten K.E. Alvager
Handbook for Scientific and Technical Research,
Prentice-Hall, 1992, p. 29
4
Formulating a Problem
Original Problem
Discussions:
Modied Problem
! literature
or public ?
Finalized Problem
Research Planning
Decision about
The Subject
Bibliographic
Search
FORMULATING A PROBLEM &
POSING RESEARCH HYPOTHESES
5
6
Problem Formulation
First step in all research projects.
Generally, most difficult element of this process is the starting point:
origin idea / topic.
Usually, a research topic is suggested by the research director/
supervisor: the topic is often chosen among the set of problems that
has been actively investigated by the group for a while.
Even though, initial idea is usually vague or brut, and necessitates
improvements and/or developments.
For these reasons, this is the stage where experience, creativity,
originality etc. are more than necessary.
7
Research a Research Problem
A Doctoral research consists normally to:
Develop a new theory, a new formalism, or
Contribute to an existing theory or formalism.
Creativity, Originality?
Classroom discussion: Are these capacities natural?
8
Developing Creativity
Lateral Thinking:
Search in the falsified domains,
Negation of a norm or standard that has been accepted as
an evidence,
Find a replacing solution to the negation.
Example: restaurant - menu
Menu-less Restaurant
What are the replacing solutions?
9
Exercise
Form groups of 4-5 students,
Discuss a research topic using lateral thinking approach,
Refine the topic though the problem formulation process
(hypothesis definition, literature search) as an initial research
idea that fulfils the originality criteria.
The selected research topic will be used as a mini-research
topic at all stages of the course.
10
Formulating a Problem
Original Problem
Discussions:
Modied Problem
! literature
or public ?
Finalized Problem
Research Planning
Decision about
The Subject
Bibliographic
Search
11
Refining a Research Topic
Topics that are too vague or imprecise require a large quantity
of work.
Mathematically, a problem leading to more than one solution
is called ill-posed problem.
Problem Space
Solution Space
Constraints
12
Hypothesis
Hypothesis expresses the elements of a research problem.
Therefore, the hypotheses define the set of experiments to be
conducted during the research.
In practice, a research topic contains more than one unknown.
During the scientific or technologic research process, the
researcher drives for the clarification of this unknown with
irrefutable evidences or proofs.
It is important that these hypotheses be well-posed.
13
Forms of Hypotheses (1)
Declarative
Expresses the relations between variables that investigators
expect to converge.
e.g., Theres significant increase in the consumption of a
car using multi-viscosity oil comparing with those using
mono-viscosity oil.
14
Forms of Hypotheses (2)
Negative (null or falsified):
Expresses the nonexistence of relations between experimental
variables.
Doesnt necessarily represent what the experimenter expected
but often used due to natural fitting with statistical techniques
many of which aim at measuring the unlikelihood (that a found
difference be higher than zero).
! Attention to confusion because expression is contrary to
expectation.
! Example: The increase in the consumption of a car using multi-viscosity oil is not signicant
comparing to those using mono-viscosity oil.#
V
i
V
j
R(V
i
,V
j
)

"(V
i
,V
j
) : R(V
i
,V
j
) # $
% P
R(vi, vj)
& 0
15
Forms of Hypotheses (3)
Interrogative:
Under the form of questions, the hypothesis interrogates
about the the possible possible between experimental
variables.
More natural for beginners,
Example : Is there any significant increase in the
consumption . ?
16
Validity of a hypothesis
Results of the experiments demonstrate the validity of a
hypothesis.
An hypothesis is not necessarily true to be valid.
Transporting an information that contributes is sufficient.
In practice, many hypotheses have been validated because
they provide significant information despite their falsified
results.
17
Results of a Hypothesis
Hypothesis providing experimentations for a theory, through an
affirmation or an invalidation/disqualification of the specific
predictions established from this theory, must be tested in one
of 4 ways:
For an extended scope of the theory,
For the limits of the applicability of the theory,
For an improved exactitude of the theory,
For the validation of the basic assumptions of the theory.
18
Hypothesis Validating a Theory
Test for an extended scope:
A theory is often applicable to sole certain restricted
situations or conditions. The theory can become more
powerful if it is demonstrated to be applicable to other
instances.
In the contrary, it reinforces the limits of the applicability of
the theory.
Test for the limits of the applicability:
E.g., Einsteins theory of relativity doesnt falsify Newtons
mechanic. It only describes the limits to which the theory is
applicable.
19
Hypothesis Validating a Theory
Test for improving the exactitude of the theory,
Theories are often a generalization of observed facts, via
objective measurements issued from heuristics analysis.
Generalization and Application are not always bijective.
Exactitude of a theory is always desired.
Test for validating or invalidating a basic assumption,
Is a baseline assumption correct? Why?
A theory could become ridiculous if its basic assumptions
doesnt have any scientific value or are not convincing vis--
vis scientific community.
Scientific Warfare!!
20
Criteria for Good-Hypotheses
Its rationales,
Its testability or valid-ability,
Its concise description,
Clarity,
Simplicity,
Briefness.
21
Rationales of a Hypothesis
Investigator must have irrefutable reasons, based either on the
theory upon which the research is defined, or on observed facts,
to define a hypothesis.
The facts or theoretical elements serving the definition of a
hypothesis come from:
Literature review,
Detailed knowledge dealing with the researchs related
works.
Normally, a hypothesis must not in conflict with major theories.
In reality, innovation often occurs from conflicts with accepted
standards or theories (ref. lateral thinking).
22
Testability of a Hypothesis
A hypothesis must be testable, i.e. :
Measurable,
Quantifiable,
Observable.
Example of relations between variables : significant
augmentation
augmentation of consumption is measurable,
Significant augmentation is to be quantified, and is
observable.
Significant differences between parametric measures are
affirmed by T-test or ANOVA; non-parametric: Wilcoxon,
Mann-Withney U-test, Friedman, Kruskal-Wallis conditions.
23
Identifying a Research Topic
Several ways in which researchers often gain some insight into their
topic when beginning:
Draft a brief title for the study: initial hypothesis or working title;
Tracking evolution of hypothesis or working title.
Another strategy for topic development is to pose the topic as a
brief question (interrogative form of hypothesis).
Newtonian approach - Practical recommendation:
Write down My study is about ; Avoid complex and
erudite language.
Consider a title no longer than 12 words, eliminate most
articles and prepositions, and make sure that it includes the
focus of the key topic of the study.
Wordings in hypothesis or working title must be defined
Process of defining the terms leads to literature review.
LITERATURE REVIEW
BIBLIOGRAPHIC SEARCH
24
25
Review of the Literature
Literature reviews help researcher limit the scope of their inquiry.
They convey the importance of studying a topic to readers.
Literature review is an integral part of the decision/selection of a
research topic.
At this point, researchers also need to consider whether the
topic can and should be investigated.
Must identify an initial topic of research (by the researcher
instead of the advisor).
Literature review relates a study to the larger on-going dialogue
in the literature about a topic, filling in gaps and extending prior
theories.
Provides a framework for establishing the importance of the
study as well as a benchmark for comparing the results of a
study with other findings.
26
Bibliographic Search
Bibliographic Search is necessary to inquire the literature, where
is found public domain knowledge, about related works to dress
up the horizon describing similar studies over time.
It is important to note that a crucial ingredient in research is that
the knowledge to be uncovered from the study must be new or
original.
A study whose results are a priori known in public domain, and
that are only beneficial to one person or a small group of
persons, will not be qualified as a research.
Several researches have been interrupted in their initial phases
for diverse reasons, but a large portion is stopped because their
research topics were not sufficiently convincing. Its not
unusual to evolve the research topic to findings from the
literature.
27
Steps in Conducting a Literature Review
A literature review for a proposal or a research study means locating
and summarizing the studies about the topic.
Ref. John W. Creswell (2003) - Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed
Methods Approaches, 2nd Edition. Sage Publications Inc. California, USA
Step 1: Begin by identifying keywords useful in locating materials.
These keywords may emerge in identifying a topic.
Step 2: Searching the materials in library databases with identified
keywords.
Step 3: Trying to locate about 50 reports and articles (or books)
related to research topic. Setting priority on journal and conference
articles.
Step 4: Proof reading the selected documents with care on the
abstracts and core results to obtain a sense of whether the
document will make a useful contribution to your understanding of
the literature.
28
Steps in Conducting a Literature Review
Step 5: For each selected document, write maximum 10 lines to
describe what you have understood from your reading, e.g. your
understanding about its contribution to the related research
topic.
Step 6: Designing a literature map, a visual picture of the
research literature on the topic. This map provides a useful
organizing device for positioning your research within the larger
body of the literature on the topic.
Step 7: At the same time with (6), beginning to draft summaries of
the most relevant articles using the results in (5). These
summaries are combined into the final literature review for the
research proposal. Make sure to include precise references.
Step 8: Discussing with peers and supervisors about your
research; either reiterate the process or finally, assemble the
literature review in which the literature is organized or structured
by its addressed concepts. Ending with a summary of major
themes found before suggesting further needed research along
the lines of your research topic.
29
Using the Internet
The Internet is not a library.
Books and journals in a library have editors and publishers.
Anyone can put anything on the internet.
Must pay attention to the credibility of the source (sponsored
by institutions, reputable private organizations, governmental
agencies, etc).
Must be able to separate the wheat from the chaff of the
internet.
30
Guidelines for Evaluating Information (1)
AUTHORSHIP
! Is the author a well-known authority?
! If not, is the authors work cited approvingly by a known authority?
! If not, can you find bibliographical information that would
validate the authors credentials?
PUBLISHING BODY
! Who sponsors the web site?
! Is the site linked to a respected organization? Information that exists
only on a personal website should be considered highly suspect.
POINT OF VIEW
! Does the organization sponsoring the website have a point of view?
Note: Information provided by corporations should be considered
advertisements. Be especially wary of information provided by
advocacy groups.
Ref. Elizabeth Kirk (2002) - Johns Hopkins University Library Web page
www.library.jhu.edu/elp/useit/evaluate/index.html
31
Guidelines for Evaluating Information (2)
CONNECTION TO THE LITERATURE
! Are there references to other works in the field?
! Are the appropriate theories discussed?
! Are controversies acknowledged?
VERIFIABILITY
! Is there information that would allow you to verify the methodology?
CURRENCY
! Is there a date on the document that would allow you to evaluate the
timeliness of the information?
SEARCH ENGINE
! How the search engine determines the order of hits?
! Some search engines sell space to advertisers. How does the search
engine you see determine the order of information listed?
READING & EVALUATING
SCIENTIFIC / TECHNICAL PAPERS
Why Is This Important?
Good research is never done in a vacuum. When we are
planning a study, we rely on:
theory,
previous research, and
good ideas, and suggestions of our colleagues.
Being able to critically evaluate the published literature is an
important part of doing research.
Reading an Article
The first thing we want to do when reading an article is to do a
little informal discovery:
What is the title?
What kind of journal is publishing this article; is there anything
special about the journal?
What do we know about the authors?
Who are they and where are they from?
Are they senior researchers or are they just starting out?
The Title
When we first start reading the literature in a specific area, we
can learn a lot by paying attention to the little things. First, we
want to look at the title. Is it fun/playful? Is it very formal and
technical? Is there anything about the title that piques our
curiosity?
The Journal
Next, we look at the journal. Does the journal have a special
mission that might influence how the research is presented? Is it
sponsored by a scientific or technical association or institution?
Is it a peer-reviewed journal; do all articles have to undergo a
review process before they are published?
The Authors
Finally, we want to look at who wrote the article. We begin to
build a body of personal knowledge about a field by paying
attention to who is publishing what kind of studies and where
they are located.
We can also learn about the authors by reading the "Author's
Notes" in the article. These will tell us whether the study was
funded by a grant, if there were other people who made
important contributions to the study, and whether the research
was student research satisfying requirements toward a degree.
We might be a little more forgiving if the article reports a master's
or doctoral thesis than if it is published by a senior investigator.
The Abstract
Abstracts give us an overview of the study purpose, general
research strategy, findings, and conclusions. They can be very
helpful during a literature search. A good abstract gives us
enough information to help us decide whether we want to read
the entire article.
Practical exercise 1: Read the abstract and determine
whether it includes each of the desired components?
1. Purpose
2. Research Strategy/Design
3. Findings
4. Conclusion
The Introduction
The article's introduction provides an overview of the problem
addressed by the research and specific study goals.
The introduction also builds a rationale for the study by
reviewing the relevant theoretical and empirical literature.
The introduction also often ends with a summary of the research
questions and/or hypotheses that guide the study.
The Introduction
Research Problem/Purpose
Most researchers are studying a specific problem. This
problem should be described very early in the article and be
followed by a description of specific study goals.
The statement of the problem and description of research
goals give the reader an immediate sense of what the
investigators are studying and why.
A clear statement early in the introduction is a strength; no
statement or one that is buried in the introduction would be a
weakness.
Practical exercise 2 - read and identify
1. What problem is being studied?
2. Is there a stated purpose or set of study goals?
The Introduction Background Literature
Should offer a clear argument for why the study being reported is
necessary. It explains the origins of the research question.
When evaluating the introduction, we read the description of the
literature carefully and ask whether the literature cited provides
good support for the study.
We also look at the kind of support offered. Is there a theory that
guides the research? Does this study build directly upon previous
research? Is it important? Will it make a contribution to the field?
Practical exercise 3: Read the background literature carefully.
1. What kind of articles are described?
2. Can you tell from the literature why the authors are doing this study?
3. Is the study important?
The Introduction
Research Question/Hypothesis
Not all studies test hypotheses. Some areas of research are
too new to warrant tests of hypotheses or the findings are so
mixed that a specific hypothesis is not supported by the
literature.
It is not a weakness of the article if there is not a stated
hypothesis. In the absence of a hypothesis, there should be an
explicit research question/goal that is clearly outlined for the
reader.
The research question/hypothesis is usually presented at the
end of the introduction and is accompanied by a rationale.
Practical exercise 4 - read and identify the answers to:
1. Does the research question/hypothesis follow
logically from the literature review?
2. Is there a clear rationale for the hypothesis?
The Method / Approach
The Method/Approach section of the article describes how the
study was conducted.
This section is rather lengthy because enough detail must be
given to allow an interested reader to replicate the study.
We read the Method/Approach section thoroughly and carefully
in order to evaluate whether the study design/model is
appropriate for answering the research question and meeting
the study goals.
When evaluating the study design/model, we examine the
sample, the study design, specific procedures, and the
measures used. We also consider how ethical issues were
addressed if there is any.
The Method / Approach
A major consideration in all research is whether the
investigators studied the kind of people necessary to answer
the research question. The Method section should describe
who was studied and how they were recruited.
When evaluating the sample, we should ask whether the
sample was appropriate for answering the question.
Practical exercise 5 If sampling was used, identify
1. Who was studied?
2. How were they selected?
3. Name the sampling strategy.
4. Is the sample appropriate; would you suspect that any bias
was introduced into the study because of the sampling
strategy?
The Method / Approach
Procedures
The Procedure section of an article describes how the study
was implemented.
From this description, we can identify the general research
strategy and any controls introduced into the study to eliminate
or minimize threats to validity.
Practical exercise 6
1. What is the implementation procedure?
2. What controls were introduced into the study?
3. Was a manipulation check included, if so, what did it show?
4. Is the study design appropriate for answering the question?
The Results
The Results section describes the statistical analyses and their
results.
In this section we evaluate whether the appropriate statistics
were used to test study hypotheses and whether the study
findings are clearly presented.
You should be able to summarize the results of statistical
analyses and address whether the results adequately answer
the research question.
Tables and figures are also used to present study findings.
These should be reviewed and evaluated as part of the
presentation of findings.
The Results
Practical exercise 7
1. Was the statistic used to test the hypothesis appropriate for
the scale of measurement and study design?
2. Were the study findings clearly presented?
3. Did the statistical test support or fail to support the study
hypothesis?
4. Did the figure effectively display the study results?
5. Can the results be used to answer the research question?
The Conclusions
When presenting their research, investigators need to draw
conclusions from the study findings and state their implications
for the field. In addition, they should point out any limitations to
their study.
The Discussion section should begin with some discussion of
whether the hypothesis was supported by the data.
The conclusions should be placed in the larger literature. What
do the study findings mean for theory? Do the findings agree or
disagree with the existing research? What implications can we
draw from this research? Are the findings important for the field?
Finally, are there any limitations of the research? Do the authors
adequately discuss these limitations?
CONCLUSIONS
Practical exercise 8
1. Did the authors offer a strong explanation of their findings?
2. What do the study findings mean for theory?
3. How do the study findings build upon previous research?
Discussions
Implications
A Discussion section should offer some general implications of
study findings. Research should not only address issues
interesting to a specific discipline, it should offer some benefit to
society.
Investigators should discuss how their findings can be used
outside of the field of research.
Future Works
Limitations
No study is perfect. Thus, in any evaluation, we must identify
study limitations. Ideally, the authors have considered study
limitations and present them in the Discussion section of their
article.
Practical exercise 9
1. Did the authors present their view of study limitations?
The References
The reference section lists all publications cited in the article. It
should be complete and in the appropriate publication style of
the journal.
It is helpful to review the reference list to obtain an overview of
the researchers who are publishing in the field and the journals
that publish similar articles. This may help you if you wish to
pursue research in this area or conduct a larger literature
review.
Summary
1. Evaluate how well the study accomplished the authors goals
and not your own.
2. Provide a balanced overview of strength and weaknesses.
3. Evaluate the technical aspects of the study and how well it is
written.
4. Evaluate each component of the study before you pull it all
together into an overall summary.
CRITICAL EVALUATION
54
55
Estimating Feasibility (1)
If the chance of success or failure of an investigation could be
anticipated as precise as possible at the research definition
phase, then useless efforts could be saved.
A research problem shall be evaluated, for its feasibility, under
the following angles:
Investigation domains: is the research topic the
development of a thought, an idea, or a mixture of both?
What are the associated scientific domains? Do we have
enough knowledge to evaluate it?
Research Problem: Can we illustrate the topic by a simple
description (with short and concise wordings) under the form
of a question?
56
Estimating Feasibility (2)
Availability of Basic Data: do we have access to basic data
that would be needed?
Familiarization with raw data,
Data Sources,
Data Collection Method,
Requirement for Specific Equipments,
Operating Specific Equipments.
Qualification: what are the primary and secondary scientific
or technological fields that would be needed in the search
for the solutions? Are we capable to perform research in
these fields?
57
Decision Criteria
Primary Criterion:
Personal Interests: research topic must stimulate
imagination, creativity. The researcher must be in.
Size of the study: research topic must be manageable.
Competence / qualification of the research team
Potentiality for original contribution.
Mastering of the domains related to the research topic.
58
Decision Criteria
Advanced Decisional Criterion:
Timing : Is the subject hot?
Originality: Has it been treated before?
Solidity: Is the research proposal complete? Is there any
contradiction?
Utility: What is the scope of the study? Is it useful? For which
audience? Probable application domains?
Morality: is there any moral or ethical issues?
Feasibility: What are the associated constraints?
Human Resources? Time?
Financial Resources? Cost?
Availability of initial data?
WRITING RESEARCH
PROPOSAL
59
60
Research Proposal
Contents of a research proposal :
Characteristics of the research; Objectives and Context.
(use decision criteria to establish skeleton)
Contents and Organization:
Information to be highlighted, keywords
Executive Summary,
Introductory Notes,
Major elements of the Proposal,
Deliveries and Annexes.
Financial Proposal,
61
Writing a Research Proposal
Before writing a proposal, it is important to consider how to write
it:
Which topics will better convey the needs and the
importance of the proposed research?
Which style will better convince the readers (supervisors or a
scientific committee) about the rationale of the proposed
research.
" Practice writing style, draft your thoughts. Ideas must be
conveyed through written words, discussions are not
sufficient.
" Analyze the styles in some selected articles or papers from
your literature review bibliography.
" Be inventive. Sometimes journalistic style helps!
62
Writing Research Proposal
Pretty similar to the Introduction of a journal article + more details.
Writing a Research Proposal is only considered when you have
already accomplished the followings:
1. Preliminary literature reviews (locating your research problem
within the perspective.)
2. Considerations to ethics.
3. Organization of your ideas (designing your writing style.)
Writing a proposal to meet with your advisors request without
iteratively identifying your research hypothesis is a waste of
your time.
63
Contents of a Research Proposal
Information to convey:
Background information to propose a framework of the
research so that readers can understand how it is related to
other research.
Settings the issue or concern leading to the research.
Suggested Model
From Creswell, 2002, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed
Methods Approaches. 2nd Edition, Sage Publications, CA, USA.
1. The research problem,
2. The studies that have addressed the problem,
3. The deficiencies in the studies,
4. The importance of the study for an audience, and
5. The purpose statement. (important stuff!!)
64
Purpose Statements
Advices:
Use words such as purpose, intent, objective, aims, to
signal attention to this statement as the central controlling idea in
a study.
Focus on a single phenomenon, concept or idea. Dont be too
ambitious!! In sciences, wed better do well on one focused topic
than flying over several ones.
Use action verbs to convey how learning will take place. Action
verbs and phrases, such as describe, understand, develop,
examining the meaning of, or discover, uncover, etc. keep
the inquiry open and convey an emerging design.
Some professors suggest the use of scripts. I do not!
SUMMARY OF PRINCIPAL POINTS
65
66
Premier Step
The difference between a trivial project and the significant
project is not the amount of work required to carry it out,
but the amount of thought that you apply in the selection
and definition of your problem.
David P. Beach & Torsten K.E. Alvager
Handbook for Scientific and Technical Research,
Prentice-Hall, 1992, p. 29
67
Hypothesis
Hypothesis:
Is the central component of a research.
Expresses the objective of a research.
68
Planning
Research Planning:
To evaluate several aspects before and during the
research process:
Obligating researcher to cite or refine the ideas or
thoughts supporting the research hypothesis and the
relationships between different components of the
research topic.
Allowing observers to criticize and to provide suggestions
that may enhance the design of experiments.
Governing the researchers activities and guaranteeing
the inclusion of appropriate procedures to different
stages of the research.
Providing a baseline with which the researcher
evaluates the completion and the validity of the project.
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN
SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
Excerpt from The Ethics of Scientific Research: Values and Principles
The Committee for Ethics in Science and Intellectual Property,
c/o Prof. Asa Kasher, Tel-Aviv University.
69
70
Truth and Freedom
Truth
The scientist is concerned with the expansion of human
knowledge,the deepening of human understanding of its
aspects, and the enhancement of human ability to exploit
this knowledge for the achievement of goals vital to
humanity, or having social merit.
The scientist served these goals, in every branch of science,
by acting in accordance with methods of scientific research
in each branch, and the rules of conduct in the scientific
community in general.
Freedom
The scientist undertakes the obligation to comply with
practical restrictions imposed upon freedom of scientific
research for the adequate safeguarding of human life,
welfare, dignity.
71
Responsibility
Responsibility
The scientist bears full responsibility for every scientific
research or experiment he/she conducts, particularly with
regards to its direct effect on human lives and on human
physical and mental health, welfare, dignity and liberty.
The scientist bears special responsibility for such direct
effects upon those participating as patients or subjects, in
scientific research or experimentation.
The scientist pays real heed to considerations regarding the
very need to use animals in planned or conducted research
and experimentation, and to considerations regarding the lives
and welfare of the animals being used.
The scientist acts out of a sense of responsibility, on grounds
of which they constantly take into account in the knowledge
that the results of his/her research may be used to attain goals
within a wide range, from the beneficial to humanity to the the
criminal and abhorrent.
72
Integrity
Integrity
The scientist performs every scientific act in accordance will
all of the requirements of the scientific method within the
framework of which he/she works, and at the highest
standards.
The scientist analyzes data and, generalizations,
experiments and theories, whether his/her own or anothers,
equitably, and within the requisite scope, depth and
precision.
The scientist presents his/her data in full, precisely, frankly,
and fairly.
73
Collaboration
Collaboration
Acts within a universal framework of scientific collaboration,
based on the shared scientific goals.
Fosters scientific collaboration by maintaining an
atmosphere of openness, mutual assistance and trust
among scientists, their assistants and students.
Merits individual, collective and institutional credit and may
possess pursuant rights to intellectual property, for scientific
achievements to which he/she has made a unique or
significant contribution.
74
Professionalism
Professionalism
Engages in his/her scientific pursuits in a wholly professional
manner, making judicious and continual use of the special
knowledge, particular to his/her area of expertise.
Strives to keep abreast of developments in his/her area of
expertise and in every area of knowledge pertinent to his/her
work.
Draws practical contributions in the field of ethics of scientific
research from the values and principles of scientific
research.
Imparts values and principles of Scientific research to all
those conducting research or experiment under his/her
supervision, particularly to students in every course of study
serving to prepare them for professional activity within the
scientific community.