Course: Research Methodology and IPR Subject Code:BRMK557

MODULE 1:
Introduction
Syllabus
Meaning of Research, Objectives of Engineering Research, and Motivation in Engineer-
ing Research, Types of Engineering Research, Finding and Solving a Worthwhile Problem.
Ethics in Engineering Research, Ethics in Engineering Research Practice, Types of Re-
search Misconduct, Ethical Issues Related to Authorship.

MEANING OF RESEARCH
• Research refers to a careful, well-defined (or redefined), objective, and systematic
method of search for knowledge, or formulation of a theory that is driven by inquis-
itiveness for that which is unknown and useful on a particular aspect so as to make
an original contribution to expand the existing knowledge base.

• Research involves formulation of hypothesis or proposition of solutions, data anal-

ysis, and deductions; and ascertaining whether the conclusions fit the hypothesis.

• Research is a process of creating, or formulating knowledge that does not yet exist.
Thus, research is an art of scientific investigation

OBJECTIVES OF ENGINEERING RESEARCH

The purpose of research is to discover answers to questions through the application of
scientific procedures. The main aim of research is to find out the truth which is hidden
and which has not been discovered as yet. Though each research study has its own specific
purpose, we may think of research objectives as falling into a number of following broad
groupings:

1. Exploratory or Formulative research studies: To gain familiarity with a phe-

nomenon or to achieve new insights into it

2. Descriptive research studies: To portray accurately the characteristics of a

particular individual, situation or a group

3. Diagnostic research studies: To determine the frequency with which something

occurs or with which it is associated with something else

4. Hypothesis-testing research studies: To test a hypothesis of a causal relation-

ship between variables

The objective of engineering research is:

• To solve new and important problems, and since the conclusion at the end of one’s
research outcome has to be new, but when one starts, the conclusion is unknown.

Dr. R. M. Math, Associate. Professor, ECE Dept., B.L.D.E.A’s CET, Vijayapur. 1

Course: Research Methodology and IPR Subject Code:BRMK557

• Research objectives can sometimes be convoluted and difficult to follow. Knowing

where and how to find different types of information helps one solve engineering
problems, in both academic and professional career.
• Lack of investigation into engineering guidelines, standards, and best practices re-
sult in failures with severe repercussions. As an engineer, the ability to conduct
thorough and accurate research while clearly communicating the results is extremely
important in decision making.
• The main aim of the research is to apply scientific approaches to seek answers to
open questions, and although each research study is particularly suited for a certain
approach
• The objectives of engineering research should be to develop new theoretical or
applied knowledge and not necessarily limited to obtaining abilities to obtain the
desired result.
• The objectives should be framed such that in the event of not being able to achieve
the desired result that is being sought, one can fall back to understanding why it is
not possible, because that is also a contribution toward ongoing research in solving
that problem.

MOTIVATION IN ENGINEERING RESEARCH

The possible motives may be the result of one or more of the following desires:
• Studies have shown that intrinsic motivations like interest, challenge, learning,
meaning, purpose, are linked to strong creative performance;
• Extrinsic motivating factors like rewards for good work include money, fame, awards,
praise, and status are very strong motivators, but may block creativity. For exam-
ple:Research outcome may enable obtaining a patent which is a good way to become
rich and famous.
• Influences from others like competition, collaboration, commitment, and encour-
agement are also motivating factors in research. For example: my friends are all
doing research and so should I, or, a person that I dislike is doing well and I want
to do better.
• Personal motivation in solving unsolved problems, intellectual joy, service to com-
munity, and respectability are all driving factors. The following factors would be a
mix of extrinsic and intrinsic aspects:
1. Wanting to do better than what has been achieved in the world
2. Improve the state of the art in technology
3. Contribute to the improvement of society
4. Fulfillment of the historical legacy in the immediate socio-cultural context.
Several other factors like government directives, funding opportunities in certain
areas, and terms of employment, can motivate people to get involved in engineering
research.

Dr. R. M. Math, Associate. Professor, ECE Dept., B.L.D.E.A’s CET, Vijayapur. 2

Course: Research Methodology and IPR Subject Code:BRMK557

TYPES OF ENGINEERING RESEARCH

Descriptive versus Analytical:

• Descriptive research includes comparative and co relational methods, and fact-

finding inquiries, to effectively describe the present state of art. The researcher
holds no control over the variables; rather only reports as it is.

• Descriptive research also includes attempts to determine causes even though the
variables cannot be controlled.

• On the contrary, in analytical research, already available facts for analysis and
critical evaluation are utilized. Some research studies can be both descriptive and
analytical.

Descriptive versus Analytical:

• Research can either be applied research or fundamental (basic or pure) research.

• Applied research seeks to solve an immediate problem facing the organization,

whereas fundamental research is concerned with generalizations and formulation
of a theory.

• Research concerning natural phenomena or relating to pure mathematics are exam-

ples of fundamental research.

• Research to identify social or economic trends, or those that find out whether certain
communications will be read and understood are examples of applied research.

• The primary objective of applied research is to determine a solution for compelling

problems in actual practice, while basic research is aimed at seeking information
which could have a broad base of applications in the medium to long term.

Quantitative versus Qualitative:

• Quantitative research uses statistical observations of a sufficiently large number of

representative cases to draw any conclusions

• While qualitative researchers rely on a few non representative cases or verbal narra-
tive in behavioral studies such as clustering effect in intersections in Transportation
engineering to make a proposition.

Conceptual vs. Empirical:

• Conceptual research is that related to some abstract idea(s) or theory.

• It is generally used by philosophers and thinkers to develop new concepts or to

reinterpret existing ones.

• On the other hand, empirical research relies on experience or observation alone,

often without due regard for system and theory.

Dr. R. M. Math, Associate. Professor, ECE Dept., B.L.D.E.A’s CET, Vijayapur. 3

Course: Research Methodology and IPR Subject Code:BRMK557

• It is data-based research, coming up with conclusions which are capable of being

verified by observation or experiment. We can also call it as experimental type of
research.

• In such a research it is necessary to get at facts firsthand, at their source, and

actively to go about doing certain things to stimulate the production of desired
information.

• In such research, the researcher must first provide himself with a working hypothesis
or guess as to the probable results. He then works to get enough facts (data) to
prove or disprove his hypothesis.

• He then sets up experimental designs which he thinks will manipulate the persons
or the materials concerned so as to bring forth the desired information.

• Such research is thus characterized by the experimenter’s control over the variables
under study and his deliberate manipulation of one of them to study its effects.

• Empirical research is appropriate when proof is sought that certain variables affect
other variables in some way. Evidence gathered through experiments or empirical
studies is today considered to be the most powerful support possible for a given
hypothesis.

ENGINEERING RESEARCH PROCESS

Research process consists of series of actions or steps necessary to effectively carry out
research and the desired sequencing of these steps.
The chart indicates that the research process consists of a number of closely related
activities, as shown (in Figure 1) through I to VII. But such activities overlap continuously
rather than following a strictly prescribed sequence:

Figure 1. Research Process Flow Diagram.

1. Formulating the research problem: There are two types of research problems,
viz., those which relate to states of nature and those which relate to relationships

Dr. R. M. Math, Associate. Professor, ECE Dept., B.L.D.E.A’s CET, Vijayapur. 4

Course: Research Methodology and IPR Subject Code:BRMK557

between variables. At the very outset the researcher must single out the problem
he wants to study, i.e., he must decide the general area of interest or aspect of a
subject-matter that he would like to inquire into.

2. Extensive literature survey: Once the problem is formulated, a brief summary

of it should be written down. It is compulsory for a research worker writing a thesis
for a Ph.D. degree to write a synopsis of the topic and submit it to the necessary
Committee or the Research Board for approval. At this juncture the researcher
should undertake extensive literature survey connected with the problem.

3. Development of working hypotheses: After extensive literature survey, re-

searcher should state in clear terms the working hypothesis or hypotheses. Working
hypothesis is tentative assumption made in order to draw out and test its logical
or empirical consequences. Hypothesis should be very specific and limited to the
piece of research in hand because it has to be tested. The role of the hypothesis is
to guide the researcher by delimiting the area of research and to keep him on the
right track. It sharpens his thinking and focuses attention on the more important
facets of the problem.

4. Preparing the research design: The research problem having been formulated
in clear cut terms, the researcher will be required to prepare a research design,
i.e., he will have to state the conceptual structure within which research would be
conducted. The preparation of such a design facilitates research to be as efficient
as possible yielding maximal information. In other words, the function of research
design is to provide for the collection of relevant evidence with minimal expenditure
of effort, time and money.

5. Determining sample design: The researcher must decide the way of selecting
a sample or what is popularly known as the sample design. In other words, a
sample design is a definite plan determined before any data are actually collected
for obtaining a sample from a given population. Sampling can be done choosing
a particular unit, random unit selection, systematic pattern, homogenous group
(stratified sampling), quota, cluster or area, multi stages and sequential.

6. Collecting the data: In dealing with any real-life problem, it is often found that
data at hand are inadequate, and hence, it becomes necessary to collect data that are
appropriate. There are several ways of collecting the appropriate data which differ
considerably in context of money costs, time and other resources at the disposal of
the researcher. Primary data can be collected either through experiment or through
survey. If the researcher conducts an experiment, he observes some quantitative
measurements, or the data, with the help of which he examines the truth contained
in his hypothesis. But in the case of a survey, data can be collected by any one
or more of the following ways by observation, through personal interview, through
telephonic interview, by mailing the questionnaire etc

7. Execution of the project: It is a very important step in the research process.

If the execution of the project proceeds on correct lines, the data to be collected
would be adequate and dependable. The researcher should see that the project is
executed in a systematic manner and in time. A careful watch should be kept for
unanticipated factors in order to keep the survey as much realistic as possible.

Dr. R. M. Math, Associate. Professor, ECE Dept., B.L.D.E.A’s CET, Vijayapur. 5

Course: Research Methodology and IPR Subject Code:BRMK557

8. Analysis of data: After the data have been collected, the researcher turns to the
task of analyzing them. The analysis of data requires a number of closely related
operations such as establishment of categories, the application of these categories to
raw data through coding, tabulation and then drawing statistical inferences. The
unwieldy data should necessarily be condensed into a few manageable groups and
tables for further analysis. Thus, researcher should classify the raw data into some
purposeful and usable categories.

9. Hypothesis-testing: After analyzing the data as stated above, the researcher is

in a position to test the hypotheses, if any, he had formulated earlier. Do the facts
support the hypotheses or they happen to be contrary? This is the usual question
which should be answered while testing hypotheses. Various tests, such as Chi
square test, t-test, F-test, have been developed by statisticians for the purpose. The
hypotheses may be tested through the use of one or more of such tests, depending
upon the nature and object of research inquiry. Hypothesis-testing will result in
either accepting the hypothesis or in rejecting it.

10. Generalizations and interpretation: If a hypothesis is tested and upheld several

times, it may be possible for the researcher to arrive at generalization, i.e., to build
a theory. As a matter of fact, the real value of research lies in its ability to arrive
at certain generalizations

11. Preparation of the report or the thesis: Finally, the researcher has to prepare the
report of what has been done by him. Writing of report must be done with great
care keeping in view the following:

• layout of the report should be as follows: (i) the preliminary pages; (ii) the
main text, and (iii) the end matter.
• In its preliminary pages the report should carry title and date followed by
acknowledgements and foreword. Then there should be a table of contents
followed by a list of tables and list of graphs and charts, if any, given in the
report.
• The main text of the report should have the following parts: (a) Introduc-
tion: It should contain a clear statement of the objective of the research and
an explanation of the methodology adopted in accomplishing the research. The
scope of the study along with various limitations should as well be stated in
this part. (b) Summary of findings: After introduction there would appear
a statement of findings and recommendations in non-technical language. If the
findings are extensive, they should be summarized. (c) Main report: The
main body of the report should be presented in logical sequence and broken-
down into readily identifiable sections. (d)Conclusion: Towards the end of
the main text, researcher should again put down the results of his research
clearly and precisely. In fact, it is the final summing up.
• At the end of the report, appendices should be enlisted in respect of all tech-
nical data. Bibliography, i.e., list of books, journals, reports, etc., consulted,
should also be given in the end. Index should also be given specially in a
published research report.

Dr. R. M. Math, Associate. Professor, ECE Dept., B.L.D.E.A’s CET, Vijayapur. 6

Course: Research Methodology and IPR Subject Code:BRMK557

FINDING AND SOLVING A WORTHWHILE PROB-

LEM
• A researcher may start out with the research problems stated by the Supervisor
or posed by others that are yet to be solved. Alternately, it may involve
rethinking of a basic theory, or need to be formulated or put together from the
information provided in a group of papers suggested by the Supervisor.
• Research scholars are faced with the task of finding an appropriate problem
on which to begin their research. Skills needed to accomplish such a task at
the outset, while taking care of possible implications are critically important
but often not taught
• Once the problem is vaguely identified, the process of literature survey and
technical reading would take place for more certainty of the worthiness of the
intended problem.
• However, an initial spark is ideally required before the process of literature
survey may duly begin.
• Sometimes, an oral presentation by somebody which is followed by asking
questions or introspection provides this perspective which reading papers do
not.
• At other times, a development in another subject may have produced a tool
or a result which has direct implications to the researcher‘s subject and may
lead to problem identification.
• A worthwhile research problem would have one or more attributes.
• It could be non-intuitive/counterintuitive even to someone who knows the
area, something that the research community had been expecting for some
time, a major simplification of a central part of the theory, a new result which
would start off a new subject or an area, provides a new method or improves
upon known methods of doing something which has practical applications, or
a result which stops further work in an area.
• The researcher has to be convinced that the problem is worthwhile before
beginning to tackle it because best efforts come when the work is worth doing,
and the problem and/or solution has a better chance of being accepted by the
research community.
• Not all problems that one solves will be great, and sometimes major advance-
ments are made through solutions to small problems dealt with effectively.
Some problems are universally considered hard and open, and have deep im-
plications and connections to different concepts.
• The reality is that most researchers in their lifetime do not get into such
problems. However, hard problems get solved only because people tackle them.
• The question a researcher has to grapple with whether the time investment
is worth it given that the likely outcome is negative, and so it is a difficult
personal decision to make.
• At the same time, even in the case of failure to solve the intended hard problem,
there may be partial/side results that serve the immediate need of producing

Dr. R. M. Math, Associate. Professor, ECE Dept., B.L.D.E.A’s CET, Vijayapur. 7

Course: Research Methodology and IPR Subject Code:BRMK557

some results for the dissertation. George Pólya (1887–1985) suggested a 4-step
procedure for mathematical problem-solving, which is relevant to engineering
researchers as well.

The recommended steps to solve a research problem are:

(a) Understand the problem, restate it as if it’s your own, visualize the problem
by drawing figures, and determine if something more is needed.
(b) One must start somewhere and systematically explore possible strategies to
solve the problem or a simpler version of it while looking for patterns.
(c) Execute the plan to see if it works, and if it does not then start over with
another approach. Having delved into the problem and returned to it multiple
times, one might have a flash of insight or a new idea to solve the problem.
(d) Looking back and reflecting helps in understanding and assimilating the strat-
egy, and is a sort of investment into the future.

ETHICS IN ENGINEERING RESEARCH

• Ethics generally refers to a set of rules distinguishing acceptable and unacceptable
conduct, distinguishing right from wrong as such

• Most people learn such norms in their formative years, but moral development
continues through different stages of growth. Although everyone recognizes some
common ethical norms, but there is difference in interpretation and application.

• Ethical principles can be used for evaluation, proposition or interpretation of laws.

Although ethics are not laws, but laws often follow ethics because ethics are our
shared values.

• International norms for the ethical conduct of research have been there since the
adoption of the Nuremberg Code in 1947.

• According to Whitbeck, the issues related to research credit dates back to the
establishment of the British Royal Society (BRS) in the seventeenth century to
refine the methods and practices of modern science. This event altered the timing
and credit issues on the release of research results since BRS gave priority to whoever
first submitted findings for publication, rather than trying to find out who had first
discovered.

• Whitbeck raised two simple but significant questions to address the tricky issue of
authorship in research:

1. Who should be included as an author and

2. The appropriate order of listing of authors.

• In an increasingly interconnected world, the issue of co-authorship is very relevant

to all researchers. There are issues around individuals who may be deeply involved
during the conduct of the research work, but may not contribute in the drafting
phase

Dr. R. M. Math, Associate. Professor, ECE Dept., B.L.D.E.A’s CET, Vijayapur. 8

Course: Research Methodology and IPR Subject Code:BRMK557

• Government bodies and universities worldwide have adopted certain codes for re-
search ethics. Research ethics and the responsible conduct of research are often
erroneously used interchangeably.

• Research ethics examines the appropriate application of research outcomes, while

responsible conduct of research deals with the way the work is undertaken.

ETHICS IN ENGINEERING RESEARCH PRACTICE

• Technological developments raise a whole range of ethical concerns such as privacy
issues and data related to surveillance systems, and so engineering researchers need
to make ethical decisions and are answerable for the repercussions borne out of
their research as outcomes.

• The reason that ethics matter in data used in engineering research is usually because
there is impact on humans. Certain practices may be acceptable to certain people
in certain situations, and the reasons for unacceptability may be perfectly valid.

• We have unprecedented access to data today, and unprecedented options for analysis
of these data and consequences in engineering research related to such data. Are
there things that are possible to do with this data, that we agree we should not do?

• Engineering ethics gives us the rule book; tells us, how to decide what is okay to do
and what is not. Engineering research is not work in isolation to the technological
development taking place.

• Researchers make many choices that matter from an ethical perspective and influ-
ence the effects of technology in many different ways:

1. By setting the ethically right requirements at the very outset, engineering

researchers can ultimately influence the effects of the developed technology.
2. Influence may also be applied by researchers through design (a process that
translates the requirements into a blueprint to fulfill those requirements). Dur-
ing the design process, decision is to be made about the priority in importance
of the requirements taking ethical aspects into consideration.
3. Thirdly, engineering researchers have to choose between different alternatives
fulfilling similar functions.

• Research outcomes often have unintended and undesirable side effects. It is a vital
ethical responsibility of researchers to ensure that hazards/risks associated with the
technologies that they develop, are minimized and alternative safer mechanisms are
considered.

• If possible, the designs should be made inherently safe such that they avoid dangers,
or come with safety factors, and multiple independent safety barriers, or if possible,
a supervisory mechanism to take control if the primary process fails.

Dr. R. M. Math, Associate. Professor, ECE Dept., B.L.D.E.A’s CET, Vijayapur. 9

Course: Research Methodology and IPR Subject Code:BRMK557

TYPES OF RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

Engineering research should be conducted to improve the state-of-the-art of technologies.
Research integrity encompasses dealing fairly with others, honesty about the methods
and results, replicating the results wherever possible so as to avoid errors, protecting the
welfare of research subjects, ensuring laboratory safety, and so forth. In order to prevent
mistakes, peer reviews should take place before the research output is published. There
may be different types of research misconduct as described, which can be summarized as
follows:

• Fabrication (Illegitimate creation of data): Fabrication is the act of conjuring

data or experiments with a belief of knowledge about what the conclusion of the
analysis or experiments would be, but cannot wait for the results possibly due to
timeline pressures from supervisor or customers.

• Falsification (Inappropriate alteration of data): Falsification is the misrep-

resentation or misinterpretation, or illegitimate alteration of data or experiments,
even if partly, to support a desired hypothesis even when the actual data received
from experiments suggest otherwise.
Falsification and fabrication of data and results, hamper engineering research and
cause false empirical data to percolate in the literature, wreck trustworthiness of
individuals involved, incur additional costs, impede research progress, and cause
actual and avoidable delays in technical advancement. Misleading data can also
crop up due to poor design of experiments or incorrect measurement practices.

• Plagiarism (Taking other’s work sans attribution): Plagiarism takes place when
someone uses or reuses the work (including portions) of others (text, data, tables,
figures, illustrations or concepts) as if it were his/her own without explicit ac-
knowledgement. Verbatim copying or reusing one‘s own published work is termed
as self-plagiarism and is also an unacceptable practice in scientific literature. The
increasing availability of scientific content on the internet seems to encourage plagia-
rism in certain cases, but also enables detection of such practices through automated
software packages. How are supervisors, reviewers or editors alerted to plagiarism?

(i) Original author comes to know and informs everyone concerned.

(ii) Sometimes a reviewer finds out about it during the review process.
(iii) Or, readers who come across the article or book, while doing research.

Although there are many free tools and also paid tools available that one can procure
institutional license of, one cannot conclusively identify plagiarism, but can only get
a similarity score which is a metric that provides a score of the amount of similarity
between already published content and the unpublished content under scrutiny.
However, a low similarity score does not guarantee that the document is plagiarism
free. It takes a human eye to ascertain whether the content has been plagiarized or
not. It is important to see the individual scores of the sources, not just the overall
similarity index. Setting a standard of a maximum allowable similarity index is
inadequate usage of the tool. Patchwork plagiarism is more difficult to evaluate.
There are simple and ethical ways to avoid a high similarity count on an about
to be submitted manuscript. Sometimes, certain published content is perfect for

Dr. R. M. Math, Associate. Professor, ECE Dept., B.L.D.E.A’s CET, Vijayapur. 10

Course: Research Methodology and IPR Subject Code:BRMK557

one’s research paper, perhaps in making a connection or fortifying the argument

presented. The published material is available for the purpose of being used fairly.
One is not expected to churn out research outcomes in thin air. However, whatever
is relevant can be reported by paraphrasing in one’s own words, that is, without
verbatim copy. One can also summarize the relevant content and naturally, the
summary invariably would use one’s own words. In all these cases, citing the original
source is important. However, merely because one has cited a source, it does not
mean that one can copy sentences (or paragraphs) of the original content verbatim.
A researcher should practice writing in such a way that the reader can recognize the
difference between the ideas or results of the authors and those that are from other
sources. Such a practice enables one to judge whether one is disproportionately
using or relying on content from existing literature.

• Other Aspects of Research Misconduct: Serious deviations from accepted

conduct could be construed as research misconduct. When there is both deception
and damage, a fraud is deemed to have taken place. Sooner or later ethical violations
get exposed. Simultaneous submission of the same article to two different journals
also violates publication policies. Another issue is that when mistakes are found in
an article or any published content, they are generally not reported for public access
unless a researcher is driven enough to build on that mistake and provide a correct
version of the same which is not always the primary objective of the researcher.

ETHICAL ISSUES RELATED TO AUTHORSHIP

• Academic authorship involves communicating scholarly work, establishing priority
for their discoveries, and building peer-reputation, and comes with intrinsic burden
of acceptance of the responsibility for the contents of the work. It is the primary
basis of evaluation for employment, promotion, and other honors.

• There is several important research conduct and ethics related issues connected
to authorship of research papers and are summarized herewith in the context of
engineering research.

• Credit for research contributions is attributed in three major ways in research pub-
lications: by authorship (of the intended publication), citation (of previously pub-
lished or formally presented work), and through a written acknowledgment (of some
inputs to the present research).

• Authorship establishes both accountability and gives due credit. A person is ex-
pected to be listed as an author only when associated as a significant contributor
in research design, data interpretation, or writing of the paper. Including —guest‖
or —gift‖ (co-authorship bestowed on someone with little or no contribution to
the work) authors dilutes the contribution of those who actually did the work, in-
appropriately inflates credentials of the listed authors, and is ethically a red flag
highlighting research misconduct.

• Sometimes, the primary author dubiously bestows co-authorship on a junior faculty

or a student to boost their chances of employment or promotion, which can be
termed as Career-boost authorship.

Dr. R. M. Math, Associate. Professor, ECE Dept., B.L.D.E.A’s CET, Vijayapur. 11

Course: Research Methodology and IPR Subject Code:BRMK557

• There is also an unfortunate malpractice of co-authorship that can be described

as —Career-preservation authorship‖ wherein a head of the department, a dean, a
provost, or other administrators are added as Coauthors because of quid pro quo
arrangement wherein the principal author benefits from a —good relation‖ with the
superiors and the administrator benefits from authorship without doing the required
work for it. Sometimes, an actual contributor abstains from the list of authors due
to no disclosed conflict of interest within the organization. Such co-authorships
can be termed as ghost co-authorship. Full disclosure of all those involved in the
research is important so that evaluation can happen both on the basis of findings,
and also whether there was influence from the conflicts.

• In another type of questionable authorship, some researchers list one another as

coauthors as a reciprocal gesture with no real collaboration except minimal reading
and editing, without truly reviewing the work threadbare.

• Some authors, in trying to acquire a sole-authored work, despite relying on signifi-

cant contribution to the research work from others, recognize that effort only by an
acknowledgment, thereby misrepresenting the contributions of the listed authors.

• The unrecognized —author‖ is as a consequence, unavailable to readers for elabo-

ration.

• All listed authors have the full obligation of all contents of a research article, and
so naturally, they should also be made aware of a journal submission by the corre-
sponding author.

• It is imperative that their consent is sought with respect to the content and that
they be agreeable to the submission.

• In case of misconduct like inappropriate authorship, while the perpetrator is easier

to find, the degree of appropriate accountability of the coauthors is not always
obvious. Being able to quantify the contributions so as to appropriately recognize
and ascertain the degree of associated accountability of each coauthor, is appealing.

• Double submission is an important ethical issue related to authorship, which in-

volves submission of a paper to two forums simultaneously. The motivation is to
increase publication possibility and possibly decrease time to publication. Reputed
journals want to publish original papers, i.e., papers which have not appeared else-
where, and strongly discourage double submission.

Dr. R. M. Math, Associate. Professor, ECE Dept., B.L.D.E.A’s CET, Vijayapur. 12