Dr. Jones and Dr. Smith are researchers based in the same department at a UK university. They have been working on a joint research project for several years, publishing a number of articles on their work in peer-reviewed journals. The two researchers are now producing a book about their research. The research was conducted under the auspices of their university.

Please post your discussion for BOTH topics and discuss in-details. We will not have any discussion for the w8 but for this week we tried to cover that.

Part 1: Case Study, Challenging questions

Dr. Jones and Dr. Smith are researchers based in the same department at a UK university. They have been working on a joint research project for several years, publishing a number of articles on their work in peer-reviewed journals. The two researchers are now producing a book about their research. The research was conducted under the auspices of their university.
The final manuscript was submitted to the publishers a while ago and Dr. Jones contacts the firm for an update. He is surprised and very upset when the publishers tell him that the book is to be published by Dr. Smith as the sole author. Dr. Jones is informed that his role in both the research and the book itself will be acknowledged in the list of contributors to the project, nothing more. The publishers’ decision is based on information supplied by Dr. Smith.
As far as Dr. Jones is concerned, he wrote the book with Dr. Smith and should also be credited as an author of the work. Indeed, he is convinced that he and Dr. Smith had previously agreed that the book was a joint work and that they would each receive co-authorship. He does not remember having any written record of this agreement or of any discussions regarding authorship.
Dr. Jones speaks to Dr. Smith in an attempt to reach some sort of agreement on the matter but the position remains unchanged. He then tries speaking to the publishers of the book. They say that they have received reassurances from Dr. Smith which they accept and they have no plans to change the attribution of authorship.
Prior to this dispute, Dr. Jones believed that he had a good working relationship with Dr. Smith. As well as wanting to resolve the issue of authorship, he is also concerned how his career may be affected by the dispute with Dr. Smith.

In your response to this sectionanswer to at least 2 following questions:
– What could Dr. Jones do?
– What ‘evidence’ or other information might shed some light on the matter?
– How might the situation be resolved?
– Could anything have been done to prevent this situation from occurring in the first place?

Part 2: Ethics in Research

What is Ethics in Research & Why is it Important? please discuss in details

Background: https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/le/content/266713/viewContent/11354213/View