Ethical Shades of Gray: International Frequency of Scientific Misconduct and Questionable Research Practices in Health Professions Education

被引:54
作者
Artino, Anthony R., Jr. [1 ]
Driessen, Erik W. [2 ]
Maggio, Lauren A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Uniformed Serv Univ Hlth Sci, Dept Med, F Edward Hebert Sch Med, Room A3060, Bethesda, MD 20814 USA
[2] Maastricht Univ, Med Educ, Fac Hlth Med & Life Sci, Maastricht, Netherlands
关键词
RESPONSE RATES; GUIDE; AUTHORSHIP; INTEGRITY;
D O I
10.1097/ACM.0000000000002412
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Purpose To maintain scientific integrity and engender public confidence, research must be conducted responsibly. Whereas deliberate scientific misconduct such as data fabrication is clearly unethical, other behaviors-often referred to as questionable research practices (QRPs)-exploit the ethical shades of gray that color acceptable practice. This study aimed to measure the frequency of self-reported misconduct and QRPs in a diverse, international sample of health professions education (HPE) researchers. Method In 2017, the authors conducted an anonymous, cross-sectional survey study. The web-based survey contained 43 items that asked respondents to rate how often they had engaged in a variety of irresponsible research behaviors. The items were adapted from previously published surveys. Results In total, 590 HPE researchers took the survey. The mean age was 46 years (SD = 11.6), and the majority of participants were from the United States (26.4%), Europe (23.2%), and Canada (15.3%). The three most frequently reported irresponsible research behaviors were adding authors who did not qualify for authorship (60.6%), citing articles that were not read (49.5%), and selectively citing papers to please editors or reviewers (49.4%). Additionally, respondents reported misrepresenting a participant's words (6.7%), plagiarizing (5.5%), inappropriately modifying results (5.3%), deleting data without disclosure (3.4%), and fabricating data (2.4%). Overall, 533 (90.3%) respondents reported at least one irresponsible behavior. Conclusions Notwithstanding the methodological limitations of survey research, these findings indicate that a substantial proportion of HPE researchers report a range of misconduct and QRPs. Consequently, reforms may be needed to improve the conduct of HPE research.
引用
收藏
页码:76 / 84
页数:9
相关论文
共 43 条
[11]   How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data [J].
Fanelli, Daniele .
PLOS ONE, 2009, 4 (05)
[12]   Questionable Research Practices Revisited [J].
Fiedler, Klaus ;
Schwarz, Norbert .
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL AND PERSONALITY SCIENCE, 2016, 7 (01) :45-52
[13]   Mitigating Illusory Results through Preregistration in Education [J].
Gehlbach, Hunter ;
Robinson, Carly D. .
JOURNAL OF RESEARCH ON EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS, 2018, 11 (02) :296-315
[14]   Evaluating Survey Quality in Health Services Research: A Decision Framework for Assessing Nonresponse Bias [J].
Halbesleben, Jonathon R. B. ;
Whitman, Marilyn V. .
HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2013, 48 (03) :913-930
[15]   Research ethics and medical education [J].
Hally, Eimear ;
Walsh, Kieran .
MEDICAL TEACHER, 2016, 38 (01) :105-106
[16]   The Extent and Consequences of P-Hacking in Science [J].
Head, Megan L. ;
Holman, Luke ;
Lanfear, Rob ;
Kahn, Andrew T. ;
Jennions, Michael D. .
PLOS BIOLOGY, 2015, 13 (03)
[17]   Offline: What is medicine's 5 sigma? [J].
Horton, Richard .
LANCET, 2015, 385 (9976) :1380-1380
[18]  
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, REC COND REP ED PUBL
[19]   Why most published research findings are false [J].
Ioannidis, JPA .
PLOS MEDICINE, 2005, 2 (08) :696-701
[20]   Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices With Incentives for Truth Telling [J].
John, Leslie K. ;
Loewenstein, George ;
Prelec, Drazen .
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2012, 23 (05) :524-532