Cargando…

Prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in The Netherlands

Background: Traditionally, research integrity studies have focused on research misbehaviors and their explanations. Over time, attention has shifted towards preventing questionable research practices and promoting responsible ones. However, data on the prevalence of responsible research practices, e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gopalakrishna, Gowri, Wicherts, Jelte M., Vink, Gerko, Stoop, Ineke, van den Akker, Olmo R., ter Riet, Gerben, Bouter, Lex M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: F1000 Research Limited 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9478502/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36128558
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.110664.2
_version_ 1784790587240611840
author Gopalakrishna, Gowri
Wicherts, Jelte M.
Vink, Gerko
Stoop, Ineke
van den Akker, Olmo R.
ter Riet, Gerben
Bouter, Lex M.
author_facet Gopalakrishna, Gowri
Wicherts, Jelte M.
Vink, Gerko
Stoop, Ineke
van den Akker, Olmo R.
ter Riet, Gerben
Bouter, Lex M.
author_sort Gopalakrishna, Gowri
collection PubMed
description Background: Traditionally, research integrity studies have focused on research misbehaviors and their explanations. Over time, attention has shifted towards preventing questionable research practices and promoting responsible ones. However, data on the prevalence of responsible research practices, especially open methods, open codes and open data and their underlying associative factors, remains scarce. Methods: We conducted a web-based anonymized questionnaire, targeting all academic researchers working at or affiliated to a university or university medical center in The Netherlands, to investigate the prevalence and potential explanatory factors of 11 responsible research practices. Results: A total of 6,813 academics completed the survey, the results of which show that prevalence of responsible practices differs substantially across disciplines and ranks, with 99 percent avoiding plagiarism in their work but less than 50 percent pre-registering a research protocol. Arts and humanities scholars as well as PhD candidates and junior researchers engaged less often in responsible research practices. Publication pressure negatively affected responsible practices, while mentoring, scientific norms subscription and funding pressure stimulated them. Conclusions: Understanding the prevalence of responsible research practices across disciplines and ranks, as well as their associated explanatory factors, can help to systematically address disciplinary- and academic rank-specific obstacles, and thereby facilitate responsible conduct of research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9478502
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher F1000 Research Limited
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94785022022-09-19 Prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in The Netherlands Gopalakrishna, Gowri Wicherts, Jelte M. Vink, Gerko Stoop, Ineke van den Akker, Olmo R. ter Riet, Gerben Bouter, Lex M. F1000Res Research Article Background: Traditionally, research integrity studies have focused on research misbehaviors and their explanations. Over time, attention has shifted towards preventing questionable research practices and promoting responsible ones. However, data on the prevalence of responsible research practices, especially open methods, open codes and open data and their underlying associative factors, remains scarce. Methods: We conducted a web-based anonymized questionnaire, targeting all academic researchers working at or affiliated to a university or university medical center in The Netherlands, to investigate the prevalence and potential explanatory factors of 11 responsible research practices. Results: A total of 6,813 academics completed the survey, the results of which show that prevalence of responsible practices differs substantially across disciplines and ranks, with 99 percent avoiding plagiarism in their work but less than 50 percent pre-registering a research protocol. Arts and humanities scholars as well as PhD candidates and junior researchers engaged less often in responsible research practices. Publication pressure negatively affected responsible practices, while mentoring, scientific norms subscription and funding pressure stimulated them. Conclusions: Understanding the prevalence of responsible research practices across disciplines and ranks, as well as their associated explanatory factors, can help to systematically address disciplinary- and academic rank-specific obstacles, and thereby facilitate responsible conduct of research. F1000 Research Limited 2022-08-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9478502/ /pubmed/36128558 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.110664.2 Text en Copyright: © 2022 Gopalakrishna G et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Gopalakrishna, Gowri
Wicherts, Jelte M.
Vink, Gerko
Stoop, Ineke
van den Akker, Olmo R.
ter Riet, Gerben
Bouter, Lex M.
Prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in The Netherlands
title Prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in The Netherlands
title_full Prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in The Netherlands
title_fullStr Prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in The Netherlands
title_full_unstemmed Prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in The Netherlands
title_short Prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in The Netherlands
title_sort prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in the netherlands
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9478502/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36128558
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.110664.2
work_keys_str_mv AT gopalakrishnagowri prevalenceofresponsibleresearchpracticesamongacademicsinthenetherlands
AT wichertsjeltem prevalenceofresponsibleresearchpracticesamongacademicsinthenetherlands
AT vinkgerko prevalenceofresponsibleresearchpracticesamongacademicsinthenetherlands
AT stoopineke prevalenceofresponsibleresearchpracticesamongacademicsinthenetherlands
AT vandenakkerolmor prevalenceofresponsibleresearchpracticesamongacademicsinthenetherlands
AT terrietgerben prevalenceofresponsibleresearchpracticesamongacademicsinthenetherlands
AT bouterlexm prevalenceofresponsibleresearchpracticesamongacademicsinthenetherlands