Inclusive Research Practices Bristol

Research, whether direct or indirect, aims to advance knowledge and change the world for the better. But whether you are spike-sorting with high-performance computers, getting through 100 single-use plastic pipette tips in a day or receiving regular shipments of metal-rich equipment, your research is having a long-term and detrimental impact on the environment. This session will explore how life sciences research contributes to the climate crisis and negatively impacts local and global environments. Practical advice will be given on ways to reduce the footprint of your own research.

Human participant research is somehow both antithetical and complementary to science. On the one hand, working with human participants provides incredibly rich and complex data with ‘real-world’ ecological validity. On the other, this richness is due to the incredible number of variables which uncontrollably become intertwined with your research interest, potentially limiting the conclusions you can draw from your work. Historical over-representation of white men as research participants, coupled with often overly-stringent exclusion criteria has led to a diversity crisis in human participant research. For our research to be truly inclusive, representative and generalisable to the rest of the population, our data must be collected from diverse individuals. This session will explore common barriers to diversity in studies with human participants, and will provide guidance on how to make sure your own research is accessible and inclusive.

A single person can be the source of billions of data points, whether these are generated from everyday internet use, healthcare records, wearable sensors or participation in experimental research. This vast amount of data can be used to make predictions about people and systems: what is the probability this person will develop diabetes in the next year? Will commit a crime? Will be a good employee? Is of a particular ethnicity? Predictions are simply represented by a number, produced by an algorithm. A single number in itself is not biased. How that number was generated, interpreted and subsequently used are all processes deeply susceptible to human bias and prejudices. This session will explore a philosophical perspective of data ethics and discuss practical steps to reducing statistical bias. There will be opportunity in the last section of the session for attendees to discuss and troubleshoot ethical questions from their own analyses in a ‘Data Clinic’.

Methodology for understanding the basic phenomena of life can be done in vitro or in vivo, under tightly-controlled experimental conditions designed to limit variability. However stringent the protocol, these experiments do not occur in a cultural vacuum and they are often subject to the same societal biases as other research disciplines. Many researchers uphold the status quo of biased basic research by not questioning the characteristics of their experimental animals, or the people from whom their tissue samples were collected. This means that our fundamental understanding of life has been built on biased models. This session will explore the ways in which basic life sciences research can be biased and the implications of this. We will discuss practical ways to assess your research design and how to make sure it is representative.