I wonder if I could ask your advice regarding an ethical issue that I am
facing.
The project is a qualitative study and has used focus group discussions. I
spent considerable time carrying out the analysis and used a
recognised method of analysis I
feel that the analysis was carried out correctly, in keeping with our
promise to the ethics committee and that I presented the data in a balanced
way.
I gave the PI who is managing the project the transcripts of the focus
groups discussions. She and her co-supervisor have spent time [I estimate
a couple of hours] going through the transcripts and have sent me a list of
"comments" or notes identifying "areas that they feel are potentially
important in the data". When I asked how this should influence my own
analysis I was told that their comments represent "expert views" of what is
important in the data and that they should be incorporated. I asked how
they arrived at these areas of interest, what was the process by which these
areas were selected and was told that they are aspects of the discussion
identified as particularly pertinent to the study aims.
We are now in a position of writing a paper. The PI is referring to the
"comments" that she previously presented to me as "her analysis" of the
data and is suggesting that she writes a paper on her "analysis" of the
data.

Can anyone advise on the ethics of this?

I can't really see any ethical issues, unless I've misunderstood your post. As long as the method section in the paper reflects accuraltey the process they have gone through then that's fine. Now whether the reviewers will think that process is suitable is another question. However, 'expert views' are often used in qualitative analysis, although often to guide a more detailed analysis i.e. you may ask subject matter experts to identify salient themes, and then these would be built on with a wider range of themes.

Hi Rut

I think it depends on whose project this is - is it your supervisor's, or yours? If it's hers, it's fine for her to go thru the notes and then write a paper. However, if this is your PhD, I think it's pretty bad that she's gone thru your material and analysed it, and even worse if she's planning to write a paper on your project. So, a bit of clarification, please?

Dear Sue and Sneaks

I consider the project as mine.  I obtained the funding, wrote the proposal, did all the transcribing of the focus groups and spent 5 months thematically analysing the data. My manager spent at most a few hours "cherry picking" what she considers important.  I would not mind if there was collaboration and discussion - it feels like an ultimatum - include my views or I will write my own paper.

I do not see how my manager could write a methods section in a paper giving details of how she analysed the data - what would she write? The data used in the analysis was phenomenal - it would not be possible to carry out any systematic analysis or become familiar with the data in such a short space of time.

Is this clarification enough?

Hi Rut

In that case, I think what's she's doing is pretty outrageous if she's planning to write an article based on your work. But could you include what she thinks are important findings, in a joint article with you as first author? And maybe try and keep the article contained, so you could write your own solo article later? If she's still insisting on writing her own article using your work, I think you'd need to have a tactful conversation with her, getting her to clarify the ethics around a supervisor using a student's work for their own purposes. Also talk to your post-grad student union, or the research co-ordinator of your area about this before you talk to her - go in there prepared.