Promoting trust in research and researchers: How open science and research integrity are intertwined

被引:0
作者
Tamarinde Haven
Gowri Gopalakrishna
Joeri Tijdink
Dorien van der Schot
Lex Bouter
机构
[1] Charité Universitätsmedizin,BIH QUEST Center for Responsible Research
[2] Amsterdam University Medical Centers,Department of Epidemiology and Data Science
[3] Amsterdam University Medical Centers,Department of Ethics, Law and Humanities
[4] Vrije Universiteit,Department of Philosophy, Faculty of Humanities
来源
BMC Research Notes | / 15卷
关键词
Open science; Research integrity; Transparency; Responsible research practices;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Proponents of open science often refer to issues pertaining to research integrity and vice versa. In this commentary, we argue that concepts such as responsible research practices, transparency, and open science are connected to one another, but that they each have a different focus. We argue that responsible research practices focus more on the rigorous conduct of research, transparency focuses predominantly on the complete reporting of research, and open science’s core focus is mostly about dissemination of research. Doing justice to these concepts requires action from researchers and research institutions to make research with integrity possible, easy, normative, and rewarding. For each of these levels from the Center for Open Science pyramid of behaviour change, we provide suggestions on what researchers and research institutions can do to promote a culture of research integrity. We close with a brief reflection on initiatives by other research communities and stakeholders and make a call to those working in the fields of research integrity and open science to pay closer attention to one other’s work.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 72 条
[1]  
Baker M(2016)1500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility Nature 533 452-454
[2]  
Goodman SN(2016)What does research reproducibility mean? Sci Transl Med 8 341-559
[3]  
Fanelli D(2022)NIH issues a seismic mandate: share data publicly Nature 602 558-53
[4]  
Ioannidis JP(2017)A manifesto for reproducible science Nat Hum Behav 1 0021-360
[5]  
Kozlov M(2002)Institutional and individual responsibilities for integrity in research Am J Bioeth 2 51-187
[6]  
Munafo MR(2021)Prevalence of research misconduct and questionable research practices: a systematic review and meta-analysis Sci Eng Ethics 27 41-undefined
[7]  
Nosek BA(2019)Researchers’ perceptions of research misbehaviours: a mixed methods study among academic researchers in Amsterdam Res Integr Peer Rev 4 25-undefined
[8]  
Bishop DVM(2022)Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: a survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands PLoS ONE 17 22-undefined
[9]  
Button KS(2019)Open laboratory notebooks: good for science, good for society, good for scientists [version 2; peer review: 2 approved, 1 approved with reservations] F1000Res 8 11-undefined
[10]  
Chambers CD(2016)The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship Sci Data 3 5-undefined