1. RCR
这张图片展示了负责任的研究行为（RCR）的概念和原则。以下是图片中列出的六个核心价值观或美德：
- 诚信（Integrity）
- 诚实（Honesty）
- 透明度（Transparency）
- 能力（Competence）
- 同事情谊（Collegiality）
- 社会责任（Social Responsibility）
这些价值观是2017年由美国国家科学、工程和医学院发布的一份报告中提出的，该报告题为《在研究中培养诚信》。这些价值观被认为是进行负责任研究的关键原则。
图片还提到，这些概念可以被称为"美德"，即在从事研究时应该遵循的积极品格特征或行为准则。
本模块的重点是个人责任，因为每个人都要对自己选择的行动负责。
组织也有责任创造和维护鼓励负责任研究实践的环境。
组织可以通过建立指导或专业发展项目，或制定相关政策和激励措施来实现这一目标。
总结了负责任的研究行为（RCR）的核心概念。主要内容如下：
RCR的核心是"管理"（stewardship）的概念。
每个研究者和研究团体都有道德义务，要利用可用资源进行最佳的研究。
研究者被赋予一定程度的独立性，以追求能够造福社会的知识。
这种特权伴随着责任，研究者需要：了解什么是适当的研究实践以符合这种知识的方式行事避免滥用这种信任
图片强调了研究伦理的重要性，展示了一个研究人员在工作中的场景，以及其他与研究伦理相关的图像，如政府建筑（可能代表法规）和一个写着"研究伦理"的标志
2. Authorship (RCR-Basic)
Publication is essential to the research process because it is the primary mechanism for sharing findings and contributes to the common base of knowledge upon which further research is built. It also alerts the larger society to information that may have important ethical, legal, or social policy implications.
Authorship can play a critical role in one's career, but it can also be a source of controversy, misunderstanding, and confusion. There are often variable and conflicting conventions, practices, expectations, and even policies that are not always directly stated yet are often assumed to be universally known and understood. This module is designed to clarify some of these issues, especially relating to the allocation of credit, and to highlight authors’ ethical responsibilities in the research environment.
出版物对研究进程至关重要，因为它是分享研究结果的主要机制，有助于建立共同的知识基础，进一步开展研究。它还提醒更广泛的社会注意可能具有重要伦理、法律或社会政策影响的信息。
作者身份可以在一个人的职业生涯中发挥关键作用，但它也可能成为争议、误解和困惑的根源。常常有变化和冲突的约定、实践、期望，甚至是政策，这些并不总是直接说明，但常常被认为是普遍知道和理解的。本模块旨在澄清其中一些问题，特别是与学分分配有关的问题，并强调作者在研究环境中的道德责任。
Learning Objectives
By the end of this module, you should be able to:
- Describe the primary criteria used to determine who should be listed as an author on a scholarly publication. 描述用于确定谁应被列为学术出版物的作者的主要标准。
- Describe the range of acceptable authorship practices, including different conventions used to determine the order of authors. 描述可接受的作者实践的范围，包括用于确定作者顺序的不同约定。
- Discuss the circumstances under which an acknowledgment may be appropriate. 讨论在何种情况下承认是适当的。
- Describe the ethical responsibilities of an author. 描述作者的道德责任。
- Discuss challenging and problematic authorship practices. 讨论具有挑战性和有问题的作者实践
A number of models and proposed standards for authorship have been put forward by other organizations. Here are some sample authorship guidelines from a wide range of professional journals and societies:
Despite the emphasis and attention paid to author order and the designation of corresponding author, the actual significance of any particular order of authors can be unclear and open to misunderstanding and misinterpretation. A reader's assumptions may not be consistent with the assumptions and intentions of the authors themselves. The recognition of individual authors is most likely to reflect their reputations, the reliability of their work, the reputation of the colleagues with whom they choose to work and of their trainees, and their cumulative contributions to the field.
Because of the complexities associated with determining what a particular author list means, some journals use an asterisk, or another similar strategy, attached to each author's name as a means for more specifically spelling out the relevant person's contribution to a project. At times, it can be used to indicate that the authors contributed equally to the work either as co-first authors or as corresponding authors.