Collaborative Research by Graduate Students

described the need for a culture of scholarly caring in graduate education developed through mentoring, supporting diversity, and having high standards.

Disadvantages of collaborative research were best identified by King and colleagues (1985) and focused on problems of status, conflict, and confusion. Singleton and colleagues (1982) and Hanson (1988) recommended including rules related to authorship, workload, and credits. Nativio and Flanagin (1994)

Olive Yonge, D. Lynn Skillen, Dianne Henderson

Olive Yonge, RN, PhD, Mu Sigma, is Professor, Faculty of Nursing; D. Lynn Skillen, RN, PhD, Mu Sigma, is Associate Professor; Dianne Henderson, BScN, is a Graduate Student. All are at University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. The authors wish to acknowledge Lyle Thomas, BSc, Alberta Foundation for Medical Research and Martin Yonge, BA, LLB, for editing. Correspondence to Dr. Yonge, Faculty of Nursing, 3rd Floor Clinical Sciences Building, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6C 2G3. 1 Accepted for publication July 14,1995.

Purpose: Educators are challenged to prepare graduate students for future cooperative efforts by fostering collaboration.

Organizing Framework: Assumptions and beliefs about collaborative research are examined and a definition and ethical considerations are suggested. A sample letter of agreement is also provided.

Conclusions: Effective collaborative research is accomplished through planning and organization, and cannot be left to chance.

IMAGE: JOURNAL OF NURSING SCHOLARSHIP, 1996; 28(4), 365-367.01996, SIGMA THETA TAU INTERNATIONAL.

[Keywords: graduate education; collaboration; thesis revision]

* * *

s the number of graduate nursing programs increase in North America, there is also an increase in student research. A thesis requires resources and, as the final measure of a student’s ability, is assumed to be independent work. However, the trend toward cross-

disciplinary cooperation and multidisciplinary research highlights the importance of collaboration for research and practice.

As members of the Faculty of Nursing at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, we were asked to develop guidelines for students’ collaborative research. The impetus came from two graduate students studying the same population and using the same research design who asked whether they could submit identical proposals. To answer their question, we studied the literature on collaborative research, then developed a model and a contract for use by the students.

Literature Review

provided guidelines for nurse authors and editors that clearly identify the order and rationale for author credits.

Spiegel and Keith-Spiegel (1970) surveyed 74 psychologists for their perceptions of authorship. As a result, The American Psychological Association developed standards for ethics review committees preventing authorship disputes. Duplicating this study with nurses, Werley, Murphy, Gosch, Gottesmann, and Newcomb (1981) found 10 points of agreement for assignment of author. Waltz, Nelson, and Chambers (1985) found that nurses agreed more about the assignment of authorship credit than did other health professionals.

Review of the literature contributed to our better understanding of collaboration. However, still unclear after our review was (a) how collaboration may differ for graduate nursing students, (b) the implications of nursing students’ collaboration with students from other disciplines, (c) how authorship should be managed for a thesis, (d) the role of thesis supervisors, and (e) the feasibility of students engaging in collaborative research.

Collaborative Research By Graduate

The following assumptions and norms were identified as applicable to ail collaborative research: (a) The research promotes ethical working relationships, compromise, and creativity. (b) Professional and research ethics are observed. (c) Collective thought is valued. (d) Each researcher is motivated to participate and be accountable for the scientific integrity of the outcome. (e) Synergy among the members of the team promotes trust and cohesiveness. Our assumptions for graduate students were as follows: (a) Collaborative research prepares students for professional practice in the evolving health-care system. (b) Collaborative research does not limit areas of inquiry or membership on research teams. (c) Written research contracts are required outlining areas of agreement between participating students and approved by thesis supervisors and the Associate Graduate Dean. (d) Collaborating student researchers must be able to provide reasoned arguments for research objectives, methods, ethics, and data analysis. (e) Conceptual and practical contributions to collaborative research must be equitable. (f) Thesis supervisors must be able to work cooperatively and ethically. (8) Students should be supported and taught the application of ethical principles and scholarly research methods. Learning should be verified. (h) Work on multidisciplinary teams is enriching. (i) Collaboration must be a student’s choice, not the result of supervisors’ collaboration. (i) Students’ motivations may differ from their supervisors’ because of differing career plans.

Ethical Considerations

Collaborative researchers must demonstrate impeccable standards of inquiry with human subjects. But unique to collaborative research by students is the need to simultaneously learn how to conduct ethical research and how to maintain ethical relations with co-investigators and supervisory committee members (Campbell & Conway, 1991; Lancaster, 1985).

Relational ethics are founded on fair and equitable distribution of workload, respect for other ideas, and open, honest communication (Campbell & Conway, 199 1; Lancaster, 1985; Martin, 1994). Ethical behaviors include a commitment to completing tasks to the best of one’s ability, recognition and acceptance of researchers’ differences and strengths, and accountability (Lancaster, 1985; Paterson, 1994; Sabo, 1988; Williams, Faulkner, & Clark, 1985). Ethical behavior is characterized by reasoned arguments regarding differences and consensual decisions (Carlson-Catalano, 1993; King et al., 1985; Lancaster, 1985). Collaborative researchers are expected to be supportive and also to motivate one another (Lancaster, 1985).

The social context of graduate student collaborative research builds on the ethical principles used in research with human subjects. Therefore, graduate student researchers must be fully acquainted with the following principles:

1. Benejicence. To do good and not harm to the well-being and reputation of co-investigators and supervisory committee members.

2. Justice. To promote a just and fair allocation of responsibilities among student researchers with varied interests, abilities, and expertise (Carlson-Catalano, 1993; Hanson, 1988; Lancaster, 1985; Thiele, 1989).

This agreement is to be utilized when two or more graduate students decide to conduct collaborative research in order to fulfill a thesis requirement.

Investigators:

w e of the S t u We understand that conducting collaborative research is a challenging endeavor that can yield positive results. In order to maximize its advantages we agree to the following terms:

A. Distribution of Workload During the completion of this research project we agree that each of the members will contribute equally to the project. Recognizing that each individual brings different strengths to the group process, we have determined the following distribution of work

Workload distribution (%)

Investigator A Investigator B Literature Search Research Design Collection of Data Data Analysis Writing the Final Report

B. Funding We also agree to share fiscal responsibilities equally, and in order to receive funding, to submit funding applications to the following agencies: Agenry Deadline for Application

C. Commitments External to theThesis Project We also acknowledge that during the completion of this project the investigators have the following commitments which may affect on the completion of this project: Investigator A

Educational Professional Vacation Family

Investigator B Educational Professional Vacation Family

D. Research Time Line In order to complete this project in a timely manner we agree to the following deadlines: Activity Date Completion of Literature Review Completion of Research Proposal Submission to Ethical Review

University of Alberta Agency A Agency B

Completion of Data Collection Completion of Data Analysis First Draft of Manuscript Second Draft of Manuscript Final Draft of Manuscript

E. Conflict Resolution We acknowledge that while collaborative research requires both flexibility and compatibility it may also produce conflict that the members will endeavor to resolve through open communication and utilization of the resources of their thesis committee as required. We agree to refer unresolved conflicts to our thesis supervisors for mediation.

figure continued top right column

366 IMAGE: journal of Nursing Scholarship Volume 28, Number 4, Winter 1996

Collaborative Research By Graduate

to be taught tasks, processes, and expectations. They also need thesis supervisors who are supportive. Therefore, an agreement open to renegotiation and signed by the students, supervisors, and others should delineate the obligations of all parties, orient students to their responsibilities, prevent problems with trust and power, and allocate ownership or maintenance of project property after the research is complete.

Collaborative student research that rests on sound principles can be facilitated by identifying underlying assumptions and ethical considerations and by preventing conflicts with a contract of agreements. As collaborative efforts among scholars increase, they are also likely to increase among graduate students. Faculty and students alike should critically assess the complexities of cooperative relationships to promote ethical, scholarly research.$Q

F. Publication and Recognition As equal partners in this project, we agree that the members will share credit equally in all publication and presentation of research results and will be listed alphabetically unless otherwise expressly provided. Although authorship i s to be shared equally, we agree that first authorship wi l l be assigned to the individual who primarily prepares the manuscript for publication or presentation. Therefore, we agree to submit manuscripts for publication to the following journals with assigned responsibility:

And to submit abstracts for presentation of the findings to the following conferences:

Further publication or presentation of research findings must be discussed among investigators before submission. In addition, further written agreements among the investigators regarding publication and presentation must be completed. No investigator shall impede the publication or presentation of results without due reason and justification.

Access to data wil l be available to all investigators. However, should the data be used to extend the original work or to contribute to another research project, footnote recognition wil l be given to the investigators of the original work in al l publications and presentations.

Journal Title Deadline Investigator

Conference Deadline Investigator

C. Extensions of Original Project

H. Loss of Coinvestigator Should any of the members of the research project be unable to complete the project for any reason, then those that complete the project and publish the results wil l assume sole authorship and ownership. However, footnote recognition acknowledging the contribution of former members must be provided in a l l presentations and published articles.

Investigator A Investigator B

Date Date

Supervisor of A Supervisor of B

Associate Dean ~ Graduate School

Date

Figure 1 : Collaborative thesis agreement.

3. Personhood. To encourage researchers’ awareness of individual strengths and weaknesses and appropriate self- disclosure (Sabo, 1988).

4. Autonomy. To permit each individual to have reasonable freedom to determine his or her own actions.

5 . Fidelity. To be faithful to negotiated commitments. 6. Veracity. To prevent deception and promote truthfulness and

7 . Confidentiality. To protect against inappropriate revelation use of good judgement (Oberle, 1993).

of information (Oberle, 1993).

Sample Agreement

The thesis agreement is shown in Figure 1. Collaborating students may be from one or several disciplines. A number of supervisors may be involved. Students on research teams need

References

Campbell, L., 81 Conway, A. (1991). Roles in research -Who’s on first? Journal of Neonatal Nursing, 9(8), 71-72.

Carlson-Catalano, J. (1993, October). Research by committee: A format to organize and conduct studies. Nursing Diagnosis, 4, 132-139.

Hanson, S.M.H. (1988). Collaborative research and authorship credit: Beginning guidelines. Nursing Research, 37,49-52.

King, J.M., White, M.A., Buckwalter, K.C., Whall, A., Lederman, R., Speer, J., Lasky, P., & McLane, A. (1985). A group dynamics view. Western Journal of Nursing Research. 4.7-19.

Lancaster, J. (1985). The perils and joys of collaborative research. Nursing

Martin, K.M. (1994). Coordinating multidisciplinary, collaborative research: A formula for success. Journal for Advanced Nursing Practice, 8(1), 18-22.

Meleis, A., Hall, J., & Stevens, P. (1994). Scholarly caring in doctoral nursing education: Promoting diversity and collaborative mentorship. Image: Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 26, 177- 180.

Nativio, D., & Flanagin, A. (1994). Writing and publishing: Guidelines. ANNA Journal, 21(6), 359-360.

Oberle, K. (1993). Evaluating nurses’ moral reasoning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

O’Connor, P. (1995). Collaborative student and faculty research. Nurse Educator, 20(4), 40-42.

Paterson, B. (1994). Collaboration in research: The perks & the perils. Canadian Nursing Research Group Newsletter, 5(1), 4-7.

Sabo, C.E. (1988). Guidelines for collaboration on researcWpublication projects. The Diabetes Educator, 14(6), 546.

Santora, D. (1982). Problems in doing nursing research: Maximizing the group research process. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 4,320-323.

Singleton, E.K., Edmunds, M.W., Rapson, M., & Steele, S. (1982). An experience in collaborative research. Nursing Outlook, 30,395-401.

Spiegel, D., & Keith-Spiegel, P. (1970). Assignment of publication credits: Ethics and practices of psychologists. American Journal of Psychology, 25,

Thiele, J.E. (1989). Guidelines for collaborative research. Applied Nursing Research, 2, 150-153.

Waltz, C.F., Nelson, B., & Chambers, S.B. (1985). Assigning publication credits: A national survey of health professionals offers some guidelines- and some areas for further discussion. Nursing Outlook, 33,233-238.

Werley, H.W., Murphy, P.A., Gosch, S.M., Gottesmann, H., & Newcomb, BJ. (1981). Research publication credit assignment: Nurses’ views. Research in Nursing and Health, 4,261-279.

Williams, A., Faulkner, A., & Clark, J.M. (1985). Exploring relationships in joint-venture research. Nurse Education Today, 5(1), 11-17.

Outlook, 33(5), 231-231; 238.

738-749.

Volume 28, Number 4, Winter 1996 IMAGE: Journal of Nursing Scholarship 367