Forum Viena Juan Martín López-Calva. juanmartin.lopez@upaep.mx María del Carmen de la Luz Lanzagorta. marucha_delaluz@yahoo.com.mx UPAEP Puebla, México

1. Juan Martín López-Calva.
juanmartin.lopez@upaep.mx
María del Carmen de la Luz Lanzagorta.
marucha_delaluz@yahoo.com.mx
UPAEP
Puebla, México

2. Judgment
of value
Judgment
of fact

3. The problem of modern
science
Judgment
of fact
“Objective”
Axiologically
neutral
Judgment
of value
Subjective
Axiological
implications

4. Axiological neutrality of
science

5. However, scientific knowledge
has always ethical foundations
and consequences
Judgment of fact
(Knowledge)
Judgment of value
(Ethics)

6. Scientific knowledge and ethical
responsibility
“A third determination of the notion of judgment
is that it involves a personal commitment…A
judgment is the responsibility of the one that
judges. It is a personal commitment”
• (Lonergan,1978, p. 272)

7. Ethics and research
(Products)
Knowledge
generation
(The goal of
research)
Ethical
dimension
(Implications of
the knowledge
produced in
terms of human
good or evil)

8. Scientific research needs ethically worthwhile ends and
valid means
Ethics and research (Process)
Knowledge
produced by
scientific
research
(Purposes of
research activity)
Process of
knowledge
generation
(means of research
activity)

9. Conceptions of researchers who are members
of the National Research System (SNI) in a
Mexican private university.
Juan Martín López Calva juanmartin.lopez@upaep.mx,
Martha Leticia Gaeta González marthaleticia.gaeta@upaep.mx,
María del Carmen De la Luz Lanzagorta mariadel.delaluz@upaep.mx,
Paulina Iturbide Fernández paulina.iturbide@upaep.mx
Universidad Popular Autónoma del Estado de Puebla, México.

10. Research subjects
Gender
Number
of
research
subjects
SNI Level Number of
research subjects
Age Years as
members of SNI Scientific area
(CONACyT)
Number
of
research
subjectsMean Std.
Dev.
Mean Std.
Dev.
Female
5
Candidate 1
47.4 8.26 5.0 2.55
3 1
Level 1 4
4
5
6
1
1
2
Male 10
Candidate 1
44.0 11.34 3.4 3.36
2 1
Level 1 9
2
4
5
7
1
3
4
1
CONACYT Scientific areas: 2. Biology and Chemistry; 3. Medicine and Health; 4. Humanities and behavioral sciences 5. Social
Sciences; 6. Biotechnology and Agricultural sciences; 7. Engineering

11. Research tools and analysis
Semistructured interview
-The interview guide is founded on theoretical contributions
by Edgar Morin (2001, 2006) and Francois Vallaeys (2014),
in addition to previous research about professional ethics.
-All the interviews were recorded on audio, following an
ethical protocol for obtaining and processing information
-Content analysis

12. Results

13. Conceptions about professional
ethics in scientific research
• There is agreement that in general, professional ethics is simply the application of
ethics within the scope of practice of a profession.
• It means to adhere to standards and moral values; not cheating; being authentic,
honest and self-critical; working with much rigor in processing and analyzing
information and giving credit and recognition to all those involved in a research
process.
• Consulting primitive original query documents or bibliographic sources and
meticulousness in the case of researchers working in the field of history of
different disciplines, the need to document all sources used, respecting the values
of each person.
• Professional ethics is seen as the signing of an implicit contract between the
institution and the researcher to regulate his or her behavior, the way the
researcher works and the way he or she gets the job done.
• Most respondents agree that the researcher must be ethical not only as a scholar
but as a person.
• One of the researchers identifies professional ethics as "doing things right " but
equates doing things right to working objectively and ”to follow the scientific
method“.
• Recognizing the dignity of the research subjects is another element of ethical
behavior identified by the researchers of our sample.

14. Relationship between scientific
knowledge and professional
ethics
• Researchers generally agree with a disagreement about the view of axiological
neutrality of scientific knowledge and the idea that objective knowledge has no
ethical implications.
– On one hand responses that suggest that if a researcher strictly follows the scientific method,
the results of their work will necessarily be ethical. One the other hand, responses who
problematize this relationship mentioned things like " ... even the most abstract things ... there
is always a kind of ethical imperative”.
– Some more researchers identify certain standards that are considered characteristic of
objective science as ethical standards.
– Another group of responses postulate that some rules of formal logic (say only the necessary
and no more, say only what is true, say things understandably) are ethical rules.
• It is also interesting that researchers identify the relationship between scientific
knowledge and ethics through the commitment of the search for truth, even if
what is discovered as true does not match expectations or personal positions.
– "Even if it is contrary to my beliefs, my prior knowledge , or should I keep trueness and that is
something that should prevail in any investigation regardless of what the case ... "
– The obligation not to manipulate the data obtained from the process of generating
knowledge.

15. Categories Criteria and professional values ​​that should guide the research activity
Research process Attachment and love of truth
Transparency and objectivity
Innovation, genuineness and significant contribution to the field of knowledge
Rigor , clarity , brevity and elegance
Ethical information management
social , financial institution and responsibility
Avoid repeating unnecessary experiments
Subjects / objects of
study
Ethical conduct research subjects using
Offer something in return to those who participate as research subjects
Use letter of informed consent
Protect and preserve human dignity
Respect to living beings including animals or cell samples
Researcher Respect the dignity of persons
Consider the community aspect of research : work in team bonding and alliances .
A correct citation
Consider family values ​​and the institution
Maturity / Stubbornness
Empathy towards the other
Autonomy
Generosity / share information
not transgress
having opening
intellectual honesty
Justice
Humility, simplicity and willingness to receive criticism
Have not only economic but scientific interest
Integrity in research

16. Some conclusions
• It can be said that there is a full agreement among researchers in
the conception of professional ethics while a wealth of nuances in
interpretation.
• The agreement focuses on understanding professional ethics as
compliance with certain rules relating to the common good in the
researcher's work , which are based on the principle of respect for
the dignity of every person.
• This implies related rigor in the query and data analysis behaviors,
to give credit to all those who contribute to a research project and
to the sources used, to think about the impact of the findings on
the research subjects involved and on the society in general and to
consider as a priority the positive impact on human and justice that
all scientific work must have regardless of the discipline.
• Coincidence is seen in their thinking that most of their colleagues
carry out their research work in an ethical manner, while
recognizing that there are unfortunately some others that do not,
which affects the desirable social commitment of research activity.