Understanding Research Misconduct: A Comparative Analysis of 120 Cases of Professional Wrongdoing

We analyzed 40 cases of falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism (FFP), comparing them to other types of wrongdoing in research (n = 40) and medicine (n = 40). Fifty-one variables were coded from an average of 29 news or investigative reports per case. Financial incentives, oversight failures, and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: DuBois, James M., Anderson, Emily E., Chibnall, John, Carroll, Kelly, Gibb, Tyler, Ogbuka, Chiji, Rubbelke, Timothy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2013
Materias:
Research Article
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3805450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24028480
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2013.822248
_version_ 1782477863000211456
author DuBois, James M.
Anderson, Emily E.
Chibnall, John
Carroll, Kelly
Gibb, Tyler
Ogbuka, Chiji
Rubbelke, Timothy
author_facet DuBois, James M.
Anderson, Emily E.
Chibnall, John
Carroll, Kelly
Gibb, Tyler
Ogbuka, Chiji
Rubbelke, Timothy
author_sort DuBois, James M.
collection PubMed
description We analyzed 40 cases of falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism (FFP), comparing them to other types of wrongdoing in research (n = 40) and medicine (n = 40). Fifty-one variables were coded from an average of 29 news or investigative reports per case. Financial incentives, oversight failures, and seniority correlate significantly with more serious instances of FFP. However, most environmental variables were nearly absent from cases of FFP and none were more strongly present in cases of FFP than in other types of wrongdoing. Qualitative data suggest FFP involves thinking errors, poor coping with research pressures, and inadequate oversight. We offer recommendations for education, institutional investigations, policy, and further research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3805450
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-38054502013-10-28 Understanding Research Misconduct: A Comparative Analysis of 120 Cases of Professional Wrongdoing DuBois, James M. Anderson, Emily E. Chibnall, John Carroll, Kelly Gibb, Tyler Ogbuka, Chiji Rubbelke, Timothy Account Res Research Article We analyzed 40 cases of falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism (FFP), comparing them to other types of wrongdoing in research (n = 40) and medicine (n = 40). Fifty-one variables were coded from an average of 29 news or investigative reports per case. Financial incentives, oversight failures, and seniority correlate significantly with more serious instances of FFP. However, most environmental variables were nearly absent from cases of FFP and none were more strongly present in cases of FFP than in other types of wrongdoing. Qualitative data suggest FFP involves thinking errors, poor coping with research pressures, and inadequate oversight. We offer recommendations for education, institutional investigations, policy, and further research. Taylor & Francis 2013-09-12 2013-09 /pmc/articles/PMC3805450/ /pubmed/24028480 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2013.822248 Text en © James M. DuBois, Emily E. Anderson, John Chibnall, Kelly Carroll, Tyler Gibb, Chiji Ogbuka, and Timothy Rubbelke http://www.informaworld.com/mpp/uploads/iopenaccess_tcs.pdf This is an open access article distributed under the Supplemental Terms and Conditions for iOpenAccess articles published in Taylor & Francis journals (http://www.informaworld.com/mpp/uploads/iopenaccess_tcs.pdf) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
DuBois, James M.
Anderson, Emily E.
Chibnall, John
Carroll, Kelly
Gibb, Tyler
Ogbuka, Chiji
Rubbelke, Timothy
Understanding Research Misconduct: A Comparative Analysis of 120 Cases of Professional Wrongdoing
title Understanding Research Misconduct: A Comparative Analysis of 120 Cases of Professional Wrongdoing
title_full Understanding Research Misconduct: A Comparative Analysis of 120 Cases of Professional Wrongdoing
title_fullStr Understanding Research Misconduct: A Comparative Analysis of 120 Cases of Professional Wrongdoing
title_full_unstemmed Understanding Research Misconduct: A Comparative Analysis of 120 Cases of Professional Wrongdoing
title_short Understanding Research Misconduct: A Comparative Analysis of 120 Cases of Professional Wrongdoing
title_sort understanding research misconduct: a comparative analysis of 120 cases of professional wrongdoing
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3805450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24028480
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2013.822248
work_keys_str_mv AT duboisjamesm understandingresearchmisconductacomparativeanalysisof120casesofprofessionalwrongdoing
AT andersonemilye understandingresearchmisconductacomparativeanalysisof120casesofprofessionalwrongdoing
AT chibnalljohn understandingresearchmisconductacomparativeanalysisof120casesofprofessionalwrongdoing
AT carrollkelly understandingresearchmisconductacomparativeanalysisof120casesofprofessionalwrongdoing
AT gibbtyler understandingresearchmisconductacomparativeanalysisof120casesofprofessionalwrongdoing
AT ogbukachiji understandingresearchmisconductacomparativeanalysisof120casesofprofessionalwrongdoing
AT rubbelketimothy understandingresearchmisconductacomparativeanalysisof120casesofprofessionalwrongdoing

Ejemplares similares