Research Integrity and Peer Review 1 (1) (2016)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
BackgroundCodes of conduct mainly focus on research misconduct that takes the form of fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism. However, at the aggregate level, lesser forms of research misbehavior may be more important due to their much higher prevalence. Little is known about what the most frequent research misbehaviors are and what their impact is if they occur.MethodsA survey was conducted among 1353 attendees of international research integrity conferences. They were asked to score 60 research misbehaviors according to their views on and perceptions of the frequency of occurrence, preventability, impact on truth, and impact on trust between scientists on 5-point scales. We expressed the aggregate level impact as the product of frequency scores and truth, trust and preventability scores, respectively. We ranked misbehaviors based on mean scores. Additionally, relevant demographic and professional background information was collected from participants.ResultsResponse was 17% of those who were sent the invitational email and 33% of those who opened it. The rankings suggest that selective reporting, selective citing, and flaws in quality assurance and mentoring are viewed as the major problems of modern research. The “deadly sins” of fabrication and falsification ranked highest on the impact on truth but low to moderate on aggregate level impact on truth, due to their low estimated frequency. Plagiarism is thought to be common but to have little impact on truth although it ranked high on aggregate level impact on trust.ConclusionsWe designed a comprehensive list of 60 major and minor research misbehaviors. Our respondents were much more concerned over sloppy science than about scientific fraud. In the fostering of responsible conduct of research, we recommend to develop interventions that actively discourage the high ranking misbehaviors from our study.
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories |
No categories specified (categorize this paper) |
ISBN(s) | |
DOI | 10.1186/s41073-016-0024-5 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
What Research Institutions Can Do to Foster Research Integrity.Lex Bouter - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (4):2363-2369.
A Thematic Review on Research Integrity and Research Supervision: Relationships, Crises and Critical Messages.Abdulghani Muthanna & Ahmed Alduais - 2021 - Journal of Academic Ethics 19 (1):95-113.
Perceptions of Work-Related Stress and Ethical Misconduct Amongst Non-Tenured Researchers in Italy.Oronzo Parlangeli, Stefano Guidi, Enrica Marchigiani, Margherita Bracci & Paul M. Liston - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (1):159-181.
Questionable Research Practices and Misconduct Among Norwegian Researchers.Matthias Kaiser, Laura Drivdal, Johs Hjellbrekke, Helene Ingierd & Ole Bjørn Rekdal - 2022 - Science and Engineering Ethics 28 (1):1-31.
A Scoping Review of the Literature Featuring Research Ethics and Research Integrity Cases.Péter Kakuk, Soren Holm, János Kristóf Bodnár, Mohammad Hosseini, Jonathan Lewis, Bert Gordijn & Anna Catharina Vieira Armond - 2021 - BMC Medical Ethics 22 (1):1-14.
View all 17 citations / Add more citations
Similar books and articles
Correction To: Ranking Major and Minor Research Misbehaviors: Results From a Survey Among Participants of Four World Conferences on Research Integrity.Gerben ter Riet, Brian C. Martinson, Nils Axelsen, Joeri Tijdink & Lex M. Bouter - 2019 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 4 (1).
Researchers’ Perceptions of Research Misbehaviours: A Mixed Methods Study Among Academic Researchers in Amsterdam.Lex M. Bouter, Gerben ter Riet, Guy Widdershoven, H. Roeline Pasman, Joeri K. Tijdink & Tamarinde L. Haven - 2019 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 4 (1).
A Cross-Sectional Survey Study to Assess Prevalence and Attitudes Regarding Research Misconduct Among Investigators in the Middle East.Marwan Felaefel, Mohamed Salem, Rola Jaafar, Ghufran Jassim, Hillary Edwards, Fiza Rashid-Doubell, Reham Yousri, Nahed M. Ali & Henry Silverman - 2018 - Journal of Academic Ethics 16 (1):71-87.
Research Misconduct in the Croatian Scientific Community: A Survey Assessing the Forms and Characteristics of Research Misconduct.Vanja Pupovac, Snježana Prijić-Samaržija & Mladen Petrovečki - 2017 - Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (1):165-181.
Integrity in Biomedical Research: A Systematic Review of Studies in China.Nannan Yi, Benoit Nemery & Kris Dierickx - 2019 - Science and Engineering Ethics 25 (4):1271-1301.
Finnish People's Attitudes Towards Biomedical Research and its Sponsorship.Elina Hemminki, Aaro Tupasela, Piia Jallinoja, Arja Aro & Karolina Snell - 2009 - Genomics, Society and Policy 5 (1):67-79.
Critical Evaluation of the Guidelines of the Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity and of Their Application.Erja Moore & Liisa Räsänen - 2016 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 1 (1).
How Do Researchers Acquire and Develop Notions of Research Integrity? A Qualitative Study Among Biomedical Researchers in Switzerland.Priya Satalkar & David Shaw - 2019 - BMC Medical Ethics 20 (1):1-12.
Recent Questions in Responsible Conduct of Research.Levi Wood - 2014 - Journal of Philosophy, Science and Law 14:1-12.
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.
Research Integrity: An Exploratory Survey of Administrative Science Faculties. [REVIEW]Pierre Cossette - 2004 - Journal of Business Ethics 49 (3):213-234.
Criminals in the Citadel and Deceit All Along the Watchtower: Irresponsibility, Fraud, and Complicity in the Search for Scientific Truth.Prathap Tharyan - 2012 - Mens Sana Monographs 10 (1):158.
Using a Two-Tier Test to Examine Taiwanese Graduate Students’ Misunderstanding of Responsible Conduct of Research.Sophia Jui-An Pan & Chien Chou - 2015 - Ethics and Behavior 25 (6):500-527.
Relationships Between the Survey of Organizational Research Climate (SORC) and Self-Reported Research Practices.A. Lauren Crain, Brian C. Martinson & Carol R. Thrush - 2013 - Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (3):835-850.
Sharing the Knowledge: Sharing Aggregate Genomic Findings with Research Participants in Developing Countries.Angeliki Kerasidou - 2015 - Developing World Bioethics 15 (3):267-274.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2020-02-03
Total views
6 ( #1,129,170 of 2,498,786 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #421,542 of 2,498,786 )
2020-02-03
Total views
6 ( #1,129,170 of 2,498,786 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #421,542 of 2,498,786 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads