Top prize in Bioethics Cartooning Contest considers substance and style in publishing; Morgridge Institute for Research, April 11, 2022

Mariel Mohns , Morgridge Institute for Research ; Top prize in Bioethics Cartooning Contest considers substance and style in publishing

"Five prizes were awarded in the fifth annual Morgridge Institute for Research Ethics Cartooning Competition, which invites participants to make a cartoon on any ethical issue related to biomedical research.

This year’s competition drew 61 entrants from 41 different departments and programs at UW-Madison and affiliated research institutions.

A panel of judges applied the following criteria to the competition: depiction and analysis of a research ethics issue, humor, and artistry. A popular vote by the public also contributed to the results. The following winners were selected:

• First Prize: Logan Keding, School of Medicine and Public Health, Endocrinology and Reproductive Physiology Program
• Second Prize: William Mayner, School of Medicine and Public Health, Neuroscience Training Program
• Third Prize: Natalie Schudrowitz, School of Medicine and Public Health
• Honorable Mentions: Sydney Hoel, School of Medicine and Public Health, Infectious Disease; Mikaela Seemann, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences, Biochemistry
• Logan Keding, a graduate student in the Ted Golos Laboratory at the Wisconsin National Primate Research Center at UW-Madison, took the top prize.

Keding works with rhesus macaques as a non-human primate model, and hopes to better understand fetal growth restriction during pregnancy.

“I love illustrating and frequently create figures for Golos Lab publications,” Keding says. “I have no formal training, but I have always loved creating all types of art.”

His winning cartoon addresses the balance of substance and style that researchers must often consider when publishing their researching findings.

“If your research is great and sexy, you are more likely to successfully publish in a high impact journal,” he explains. “Creating relevant, engaging, visually pleasing work is not necessarily a bad thing—but it does create an accessory incentive, outside the quality of the work at hand, for scientists to consider when pursuing research or publication.”

As a first-year PhD candidate, Keding says his laboratory colleagues are invaluable in shaping his perspective on research and ethics.

“I often turn to more senior graduate students, colleagues, or mentors to discuss questions I have about research philosophy or bioethical issues,” he says. “I often get good, candid feedback this way.”

The Morgridge Ethics Cartooning Competition, developed by Morgridge Bioethics Scholar in Residence Pilar Ossorio, encourages scientists to shed light on timely or recurring issues that arise in scientific research.

“I love seeing when our artists get to talk to others about ethical issues and what their intentions were, and the experience of making their cartoons,” says Ossorio. “I think it’s another way for them to have an impact on the world and to bring their scientific knowledge to the broader public. It’s been really great.”

The top five winning cartoons are depicted below. Ossorio’s team thanks all the contest entrants for their creative works that addressed important ethical issues in biomedical research."

Vote now in the 2022 Morgridge Ethics Cartooning Competition; Morgridge Institute for Research, February 11, 2022

Morgridge Institute for Research ; Vote now in the 2022 Morgridge Ethics Cartooning Competition

"Sixteen cartoons have been selected as finalists in the 2022 Ethics Cartooning Competition, an annual contest sponsored by the Morgridge Institute. 

The competition encourages ethics conversations and deliberation among scientists conducting biomedical research at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and affiliated biomedical research centers or institutes.

A panel of judges has chosen the following cartoons for display to the public. You can vote below and help determine the 2022 winners! 

This year’s cartoons depict a variety of research ethics topics, such as the ethics of scientific funding and publishing, the moral status of brain organoids, the ethics of experimenting on animals, environmental and social impacts of science, and problems of communication between scientists and non-scientists."

A New Model For AI Ethics In R&D; Forbes, March 27, 2019

Cansu Canca, Forbes; 

A New Model For AI Ethics In R&D

"The ethical framework that evolved for biomedical research—namely, the ethics oversight and compliance model—was developed in reaction to the horrors arising from biomedical research during World War II and which continued all the way into the ’70s.

In response, bioethics principles and ethics review boards guided by these principles were established to prevent unethical research. In the process, these boards were given a heavy hand to regulate research without checks and balances to control them. Despite deep theoretical weaknesses in its framework and massive practical problems in its implementation, this became the default ethics governance model, perhaps due to the lack of competition.

The framework now emerging for AI ethics resembles this model closely. In fact, the latest set of AI principles—drafted by AI4People and forming the basis for the Draft Ethics Guidelines of the European Commission’s High-Level Expert Group on AI—evaluates 47 proposed principles and condenses them into just five.

Four of these are exactly the same as traditional bioethics principles: respect for autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice, as defined in the Belmont Report of 1979. There is just one new principle added—explicability. But even that is not really a principle itself, but rather a means of realizing the other principles. In other words, the emerging default model for AI ethics is a direct transplant of bioethics principles and ethics boards to AI ethics. Unfortunately, it leaves much to be desired for effective and meaningful integration of ethics into the field of AI."