Cargando…
Rethinking success, integrity, and culture in research (part 2) — a multi-actor qualitative study on problems of science
BACKGROUND: Research misconduct and questionable research practices have been the subject of increasing attention in the past few years. But despite the rich body of research available, few empirical works also include the perspectives of non-researcher stakeholders. METHODS: We conducted semi-struc...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7807493/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33441167 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41073-020-00105-z |
_version_ | 1783636753142251520 |
---|---|
author | Aubert Bonn, Noémie Pinxten, Wim |
author_facet | Aubert Bonn, Noémie Pinxten, Wim |
author_sort | Aubert Bonn, Noémie |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Research misconduct and questionable research practices have been the subject of increasing attention in the past few years. But despite the rich body of research available, few empirical works also include the perspectives of non-researcher stakeholders. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with policy makers, funders, institution leaders, editors or publishers, research integrity office members, research integrity community members, laboratory technicians, researchers, research students, and former-researchers who changed career to inquire on the topics of success, integrity, and responsibilities in science. We used the Flemish biomedical landscape as a baseline to be able to grasp the views of interacting and complementary actors in a system setting. RESULTS: Given the breadth of our results, we divided our findings in a two-paper series with the current paper focusing on the problems that affect the integrity and research culture. We first found that different actors have different perspectives on the problems that affect the integrity and culture of research. Problems were either linked to personalities and attitudes, or to the climates in which researchers operate. Elements that were described as essential for success (in the associate paper) were often thought to accentuate the problems of research climates by disrupting research culture and research integrity. Even though all participants agreed that current research climates need to be addressed, participants generally did not feel responsible nor capable of initiating change. Instead, respondents revealed a circle of blame and mistrust between actor groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings resonate with recent debates, and extrapolate a few action points which might help advance the discussion. First, the research integrity debate must revisit and tackle the way in which researchers are assessed. Second, approaches to promote better science need to address the impact that research climates have on research integrity and research culture rather than to capitalize on individual researchers’ compliance. Finally, inter-actor dialogues and shared decision making must be given priority to ensure that the perspectives of the full research system are captured. Understanding the relations and interdependency between these perspectives is key to be able to address the problems of science. STUDY REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/33v3m SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41073-020-00105-z. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7807493 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78074932021-01-14 Rethinking success, integrity, and culture in research (part 2) — a multi-actor qualitative study on problems of science Aubert Bonn, Noémie Pinxten, Wim Res Integr Peer Rev Research BACKGROUND: Research misconduct and questionable research practices have been the subject of increasing attention in the past few years. But despite the rich body of research available, few empirical works also include the perspectives of non-researcher stakeholders. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with policy makers, funders, institution leaders, editors or publishers, research integrity office members, research integrity community members, laboratory technicians, researchers, research students, and former-researchers who changed career to inquire on the topics of success, integrity, and responsibilities in science. We used the Flemish biomedical landscape as a baseline to be able to grasp the views of interacting and complementary actors in a system setting. RESULTS: Given the breadth of our results, we divided our findings in a two-paper series with the current paper focusing on the problems that affect the integrity and research culture. We first found that different actors have different perspectives on the problems that affect the integrity and culture of research. Problems were either linked to personalities and attitudes, or to the climates in which researchers operate. Elements that were described as essential for success (in the associate paper) were often thought to accentuate the problems of research climates by disrupting research culture and research integrity. Even though all participants agreed that current research climates need to be addressed, participants generally did not feel responsible nor capable of initiating change. Instead, respondents revealed a circle of blame and mistrust between actor groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings resonate with recent debates, and extrapolate a few action points which might help advance the discussion. First, the research integrity debate must revisit and tackle the way in which researchers are assessed. Second, approaches to promote better science need to address the impact that research climates have on research integrity and research culture rather than to capitalize on individual researchers’ compliance. Finally, inter-actor dialogues and shared decision making must be given priority to ensure that the perspectives of the full research system are captured. Understanding the relations and interdependency between these perspectives is key to be able to address the problems of science. STUDY REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/33v3m SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s41073-020-00105-z. BioMed Central 2021-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7807493/ /pubmed/33441167 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41073-020-00105-z Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 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 in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Aubert Bonn, Noémie Pinxten, Wim Rethinking success, integrity, and culture in research (part 2) — a multi-actor qualitative study on problems of science |
title | Rethinking success, integrity, and culture in research (part 2) — a multi-actor qualitative study on problems of science |
title_full | Rethinking success, integrity, and culture in research (part 2) — a multi-actor qualitative study on problems of science |
title_fullStr | Rethinking success, integrity, and culture in research (part 2) — a multi-actor qualitative study on problems of science |
title_full_unstemmed | Rethinking success, integrity, and culture in research (part 2) — a multi-actor qualitative study on problems of science |
title_short | Rethinking success, integrity, and culture in research (part 2) — a multi-actor qualitative study on problems of science |
title_sort | rethinking success, integrity, and culture in research (part 2) — a multi-actor qualitative study on problems of science |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7807493/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33441167 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41073-020-00105-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT aubertbonnnoemie rethinkingsuccessintegrityandcultureinresearchpart2amultiactorqualitativestudyonproblemsofscience AT pinxtenwim rethinkingsuccessintegrityandcultureinresearchpart2amultiactorqualitativestudyonproblemsofscience |