Cargando…

Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands

Prevalence of research misconduct, questionable research practices (QRPs) and their associations with a range of explanatory factors has not been studied sufficiently among academic researchers. The National Survey on Research Integrity targeted all disciplinary fields and academic ranks in the Neth...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gopalakrishna, Gowri, ter Riet, Gerben, Vink, Gerko, Stoop, Ineke, Wicherts, Jelte M., Bouter, Lex M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8849616/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35171921
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263023
_version_ 1784652492430114816
author Gopalakrishna, Gowri
ter Riet, Gerben
Vink, Gerko
Stoop, Ineke
Wicherts, Jelte M.
Bouter, Lex M.
author_facet Gopalakrishna, Gowri
ter Riet, Gerben
Vink, Gerko
Stoop, Ineke
Wicherts, Jelte M.
Bouter, Lex M.
author_sort Gopalakrishna, Gowri
collection PubMed
description Prevalence of research misconduct, questionable research practices (QRPs) and their associations with a range of explanatory factors has not been studied sufficiently among academic researchers. The National Survey on Research Integrity targeted all disciplinary fields and academic ranks in the Netherlands. It included questions about engagement in fabrication, falsification and 11 QRPs over the previous three years, and 12 explanatory factor scales. We ensured strict identity protection and used the randomized response method for questions on research misconduct. 6,813 respondents completed the survey. Prevalence of fabrication was 4.3% (95% CI: 2.9, 5.7) and of falsification 4.2% (95% CI: 2.8, 5.6). Prevalence of QRPs ranged from 0.6% (95% CI: 0.5, 0.9) to 17.5% (95% CI: 16.4, 18.7) with 51.3% (95% CI: 50.1, 52.5) of respondents engaging frequently in at least one QRP. Being a PhD candidate or junior researcher increased the odds of frequently engaging in at least one QRP, as did being male. Scientific norm subscription (odds ratio (OR) 0.79; 95% CI: 0.63, 1.00) and perceived likelihood of detection by reviewers (OR 0.62, 95% CI: 0.44, 0.88) were associated with engaging in less research misconduct. Publication pressure was associated with more often engaging in one or more QRPs frequently (OR 1.22, 95% CI: 1.14, 1.30). We found higher prevalence of misconduct than earlier surveys. Our results suggest that greater emphasis on scientific norm subscription, strengthening reviewers in their role as gatekeepers of research quality and curbing the “publish or perish” incentive system promotes research integrity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8849616
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88496162022-02-17 Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands Gopalakrishna, Gowri ter Riet, Gerben Vink, Gerko Stoop, Ineke Wicherts, Jelte M. Bouter, Lex M. PLoS One Research Article Prevalence of research misconduct, questionable research practices (QRPs) and their associations with a range of explanatory factors has not been studied sufficiently among academic researchers. The National Survey on Research Integrity targeted all disciplinary fields and academic ranks in the Netherlands. It included questions about engagement in fabrication, falsification and 11 QRPs over the previous three years, and 12 explanatory factor scales. We ensured strict identity protection and used the randomized response method for questions on research misconduct. 6,813 respondents completed the survey. Prevalence of fabrication was 4.3% (95% CI: 2.9, 5.7) and of falsification 4.2% (95% CI: 2.8, 5.6). Prevalence of QRPs ranged from 0.6% (95% CI: 0.5, 0.9) to 17.5% (95% CI: 16.4, 18.7) with 51.3% (95% CI: 50.1, 52.5) of respondents engaging frequently in at least one QRP. Being a PhD candidate or junior researcher increased the odds of frequently engaging in at least one QRP, as did being male. Scientific norm subscription (odds ratio (OR) 0.79; 95% CI: 0.63, 1.00) and perceived likelihood of detection by reviewers (OR 0.62, 95% CI: 0.44, 0.88) were associated with engaging in less research misconduct. Publication pressure was associated with more often engaging in one or more QRPs frequently (OR 1.22, 95% CI: 1.14, 1.30). We found higher prevalence of misconduct than earlier surveys. Our results suggest that greater emphasis on scientific norm subscription, strengthening reviewers in their role as gatekeepers of research quality and curbing the “publish or perish” incentive system promotes research integrity. Public Library of Science 2022-02-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8849616/ /pubmed/35171921 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263023 Text en © 2022 Gopalakrishna et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Gopalakrishna, Gowri
ter Riet, Gerben
Vink, Gerko
Stoop, Ineke
Wicherts, Jelte M.
Bouter, Lex M.
Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands
title Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands
title_full Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands
title_fullStr Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands
title_full_unstemmed Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands
title_short Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands
title_sort prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: a survey among academic researchers in the netherlands
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8849616/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35171921
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263023
work_keys_str_mv AT gopalakrishnagowri prevalenceofquestionableresearchpracticesresearchmisconductandtheirpotentialexplanatoryfactorsasurveyamongacademicresearchersinthenetherlands
AT terrietgerben prevalenceofquestionableresearchpracticesresearchmisconductandtheirpotentialexplanatoryfactorsasurveyamongacademicresearchersinthenetherlands
AT vinkgerko prevalenceofquestionableresearchpracticesresearchmisconductandtheirpotentialexplanatoryfactorsasurveyamongacademicresearchersinthenetherlands
AT stoopineke prevalenceofquestionableresearchpracticesresearchmisconductandtheirpotentialexplanatoryfactorsasurveyamongacademicresearchersinthenetherlands
AT wichertsjeltem prevalenceofquestionableresearchpracticesresearchmisconductandtheirpotentialexplanatoryfactorsasurveyamongacademicresearchersinthenetherlands
AT bouterlexm prevalenceofquestionableresearchpracticesresearchmisconductandtheirpotentialexplanatoryfactorsasurveyamongacademicresearchersinthenetherlands