game [Wright, 2000]. On the other hand, academic science is being forced into an overly competitive mode by the increasing emphasis on publication records for both funding and promotion decisions [Maddox, 1993]. Personally, I enjoy cooperation more and I unconsciously seem to use tit for tat, achieving cooperation most of the time without the sucker’s disadvantage.
“And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.” [1 Corinthians 13]
Science Ethics
Personal and professional ethics are not distinguishable; all ethics are personal. A scientist must make ethical decisions with care, not only because they affect self image but also because, as Sindermann [1987] has pointed out, scientific reputations are fragile.
Some rules of scientific ethics are universal, and others are subjective. All require personal judgment. Not all of the ethical opinions that follow can claim consensus. Another perspective, and one which has been subjected to much wider review, is given in the excellent pamphlet, “On Being a Scientist” [Committee on the Conduct of Science, 1989]. Scientists are not democratic; most insist on deciding personally whether a rule warrants following, rather than accepting the majority vote. Imagine yourself, for example, in the following situations; what would your decision be in each case?
Research project:
• You have just completed a study on the effect of X on Y. Nineteen of the twenty data points exhibit a very close relationship between X and Y, but something seems to be wrong with one data point: it is far different from the pattern. Should you omit it from your publication entirely, include it and explain that you consider it to be anomalous, or include it just like the other data?
• In your publication you cite relevant studies by others. Should you devote just as much discussion to studies that are inconsistent with your conclusions as to studies that are consistent?
• You have reached an insight inspired by reading a preprint, a pre-publication copy of a scientific article. Should you immediately publish the idea, giving credit to the preprint?
• For the paper that you are writing, should you include as authors people who have made useful suggestions? People who did only 5% of the work? People who did substantial work but disagree with your analysis or conclusions?
• Your graduate student has selected, carried out, and written up a project. You provided funding and guidance. What should the authorship be?
Research-related issues:
• Is it OK to make a personal copy of software, if you cannot afford to purchase it? Is it OK to buy one copy of a program, then install it on all of the computers in your lab?
• You are filling out a travel expense form. It forbids claiming an item (e.g. tips) that you consider to be a legitimate expense, or you failed to get a receipt for some item and you are not allowed re -
