Cargando…
Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity
BACKGROUND: Codes 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 fre...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5803629/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29451551 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0024-5 |
_version_ | 1783298690769747968 |
---|---|
author | Bouter, Lex M. Tijdink, Joeri Axelsen, Nils Martinson, Brian C. ter Riet, Gerben |
author_facet | Bouter, Lex M. Tijdink, Joeri Axelsen, Nils Martinson, Brian C. ter Riet, Gerben |
author_sort | Bouter, Lex M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Codes 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. METHODS: A 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 (validity), 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. RESULTS: Response 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. CONCLUSIONS: We designed a comprehensive list of 60 major and minor research misbehaviors. Our respondents were much more concerned over sloppy science than about scientific fraud (FFP). In the fostering of responsible conduct of research, we recommend to develop interventions that actively discourage the high ranking misbehaviors from our study. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s41073-016-0024-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5803629 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58036292018-02-15 Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity Bouter, Lex M. Tijdink, Joeri Axelsen, Nils Martinson, Brian C. ter Riet, Gerben Res Integr Peer Rev Research BACKGROUND: Codes 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. METHODS: A 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 (validity), 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. RESULTS: Response 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. CONCLUSIONS: We designed a comprehensive list of 60 major and minor research misbehaviors. Our respondents were much more concerned over sloppy science than about scientific fraud (FFP). In the fostering of responsible conduct of research, we recommend to develop interventions that actively discourage the high ranking misbehaviors from our study. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s41073-016-0024-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5803629/ /pubmed/29451551 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0024-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Bouter, Lex M. Tijdink, Joeri Axelsen, Nils Martinson, Brian C. ter Riet, Gerben Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity |
title | Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity |
title_full | Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity |
title_fullStr | Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity |
title_full_unstemmed | Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity |
title_short | Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity |
title_sort | ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four world conferences on research integrity |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5803629/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29451551 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41073-016-0024-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bouterlexm rankingmajorandminorresearchmisbehaviorsresultsfromasurveyamongparticipantsoffourworldconferencesonresearchintegrity AT tijdinkjoeri rankingmajorandminorresearchmisbehaviorsresultsfromasurveyamongparticipantsoffourworldconferencesonresearchintegrity AT axelsennils rankingmajorandminorresearchmisbehaviorsresultsfromasurveyamongparticipantsoffourworldconferencesonresearchintegrity AT martinsonbrianc rankingmajorandminorresearchmisbehaviorsresultsfromasurveyamongparticipantsoffourworldconferencesonresearchintegrity AT terrietgerben rankingmajorandminorresearchmisbehaviorsresultsfromasurveyamongparticipantsoffourworldconferencesonresearchintegrity |