Journal of Business Ethics 49 (3):213-234 (2004)
Abstract |
This research focuses on the perceptions of research integrity held by administrative science faculty members in French-language universities in Québec. More specifically, the survey was conducted to isolate and analyse the opinions of the target group concerning the seriousness and frequency of various types of conduct generally associated with a lack of integrity among researchers, peer reviewers and editors (or other assessment supervisors), the causes attributed to research misconduct, and the solutions proposed. Its main interest is to encourage researchers to reflect on the standards they would like to see introduced, based on their own statements concerning what they think and do about research integrity. Each of the 699 faculty members surveyed received a 91-item questionnaire by mail, and 136 completed and returned it. The results show, among other things, that the respondents did not take the question of research integrity lightly; in almost all cases, they considered the types of conduct studied to be at least moderately reprehensible and often very reprehensible. In addition, the same types of conduct were considered to be, or almost to be, moderately frequent. Causes were closely linked to the achievement of professional success. Solutions related to the promotion of publication quality instead of quantity and to the inclusion of at least one full session on research integrity in advanced programs were very clearly favoured. However, in all cases, the consensus did not appear to be very strong. The limits of the results are discussed, along with the recommendations and research possibilities to which they lead.
|
Keywords | administrative science research integrity scientific integrity |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
DOI | 10.1023/B:BUSI.0000017967.83925.63 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
Ethical Decision Making in the Medical Profession: An Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior. [REVIEW]Donna M. Randall & Annetta M. Gibson - 1991 - Journal of Business Ethics 10 (2):111 - 122.
Stealing Into Print: Fraud, Plagiarism, and Misconduct in Scientific Publishing.Marcel C. LaFollette - 1992 - Univ of California Press.
Ethics and Accounting Doctoral Education.Stephen E. Loeb - 1994 - Journal of Business Ethics 13 (10):817 - 828.
Citations of this work BETA
Scientists Admitting to Plagiarism: A Meta-Analysis of Surveys.Vanja Pupovac & Daniele Fanelli - 2015 - Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (5):1331-1352.
Who Rules the Ruler? On the Misconduct of Journal Editors.Aurora A. C. Teixeira & Mariana Fontes da Costa - 2010 - Journal of Academic Ethics 8 (2):111-128.
The Problem of Humiliation in Peer Review.Debra R. Comer & Michael Schwartz - 2014 - Ethics and Education 9 (2):141-156.
Fixing the Game? Legitimacy, Morality Policy and Research in Gambling.Rohan Miller & Grant Michelson - 2013 - Journal of Business Ethics 116 (3):601-614.
Research Integrity in Greater China: Surveying Regulations, Perceptions and Knowledge of Research Integrity From a Hong Kong Perspective.Sara R. Jordan & Phillip W. Gray - 2013 - Developing World Bioethics 13 (3):125-137.
View all 8 citations / Add more citations
Similar books and articles
Researcher Views About Funding Sources and Conflicts of Interest in Nanotechnology.Katherine A. McComas - 2012 - Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (4):699-717.
Graduate Socialization in the Responsible Conduct of Research: A National Survey on the Research Ethics Training Experiences of Psychology Doctoral Students.Lindsay G. Feldman, Adam L. Fried & Celia B. Fisher - 2009 - Ethics and Behavior 19 (6):496-518.
Six Domains of Research Ethics: A Heuristic Framework for the Responsible Conduct of Research.Kenneth D. Pimple - 2002 - Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (2):191-205.
The Role of Scientific Associations in Promoting Research Integrity and Deterring Research Misconduct: Commentary on ‘Challenges in Studying the Effects of Scientific Societies on Research Integrity’.Melissa S. Anderson & Joseph B. Shultz - 2003 - Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (2):269-272.
Challenges in Studying the Effects of Scientific Societies on Research Integrity.Felice J. Levine & Joyce M. Iutcovich - 2003 - Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (2):257-268.
Confronting Misconduct in Science in the 1980s and 1990s: What has and has Not Been Accomplished?Nicholas H. Steneck - 1999 - Science and Engineering Ethics 5 (2):161-176.
Measuring Consensus About Scientific Research Norms.Richard A. Berk, Stanley G. Korenman & Neil S. Wenger - 2000 - Science and Engineering Ethics 6 (3):315-340.
Scientific Societies and Research Integrity: What Are They Doing and How Well Are They Doing It?Margot Iverson, Mark S. Frankel & Sanyin Siang - 2003 - Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (2):141-158.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2009-01-28
Total views
19 ( #579,578 of 2,499,411 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #418,166 of 2,499,411 )
2009-01-28
Total views
19 ( #579,578 of 2,499,411 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #418,166 of 2,499,411 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads