What Research Institutions Can Do to Foster Research Integrity

被引:50
作者
Bouter, Lex [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Amsterdam, Med Ctr, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Vrije Univ, Fac Humanities, Dept Philosophy, Amsterdam, Netherlands
关键词
Research integrity; Research misconduct; Fabrication; Falsification; Questionable research practices; Meta-research;
D O I
10.1007/s11948-020-00178-5
中图分类号
B82 [伦理学(道德学)];
学科分类号
摘要
In many countries attention for fostering research integrity started with a misconduct case that got a lot of media exposure. But there is an emerging consensus that questionable research practices are more harmful due to their high prevalence. QRPs have in common that they can help to make study results more exciting, more positive and more statistically significant. That makes them tempting to engage in. Research institutions have the duty to empower their research staff to steer away from QRPs and to explain how they realize that in a Research Integrity Promotion Plan. Avoiding perverse incentives in assessing researchers for career advancement is an important element in that plan. Research institutions, funding agencies and journals should make their research integrity policies as evidence-based as possible. The dilemmas and distractions researchers face are real and universal. We owe it to society to collaborate and to do our utmost best to prevent QRPs and to foster research integrity.
引用
收藏
页码:2363 / 2369
页数:7
相关论文
共 21 条
  • [1] Shifting Perspectives on Research Integrity
    Anderson, Melissa S.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF EMPIRICAL RESEARCH ON HUMAN RESEARCH ETHICS, 2018, 13 (05) : 459 - 460
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2019, NATURE, P570
  • [3] [Anonymous], 2017, FRONT INT RES
  • [4] Academic misconduct, misrepresentation and gaming: A reassessment
    Biagioli, Mario
    Kenney, Martin
    Martin, Ben R.
    Walsh, John P.
    [J]. RESEARCH POLICY, 2019, 48 (02) : 401 - 413
  • [5] Fostering responsible research practices is a shared responsibility of multiple stakeholders
    Bouter, Lex M.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2018, 96 : 143 - 146
  • [6] Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity
    Lex M. Bouter
    Joeri Tijdink
    Nils Axelsen
    Brian C. Martinson
    Gerben ter Riet
    [J]. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1 (1)
  • [7] European Network of Research Integrity Offices, 2019, REC INV RES MISC
  • [8] Working with Research Integrity-Guidance for Research Performing Organisations: The Bonn PRINTEGER Statement
    Forsberg, Ellen-Marie
    Anthun, Frank O.
    Bailey, Sharon
    Birchley, Giles
    Bout, Henriette
    Casonato, Carlo
    Fuster, Gloria Gonzalez
    Heinrichs, Bert
    Horbach, Serge
    Jacobsen, Ingrid Skjaeggestad
    Janssen, Jacques
    Kaiser, Matthias
    Lerouge, Inge
    van der Meulen, Barend
    de Rijcke, Sarah
    Saretzki, Thomas
    Sutrop, Margit
    Tazewell, Marta
    Varantola, Krista
    Vie, Knut Jorgen
    Zwart, Hub
    Zoeller, Mira
    [J]. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS, 2018, 24 (04) : 1023 - 1034
  • [9] Researchers' perceptions of research misbehaviours: a mixed methods study among academic researchers in Amsterdam
    Haven, Tamarinde L.
    Tijdink, Joeri K.
    Pasman, H. Roeline
    Widdershoven, Guy
    ter Riet, Gerben
    Bouter, Lex M.
    [J]. RESEARCH INTEGRITY AND PEER REVIEW, 2019, 4 (01)
  • [10] The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics
    Hicks, Diana
    Wouters, Paul
    Waltman, Ludo
    de Rijcke, Sarah
    Rafols, Ismael
    [J]. NATURE, 2015, 520 (7548) : 429 - 431