Magnitude and Factors Associated with Research Misconduct at a Public University in Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

Abstract

Background: Research integrity, essential for ethical scientific research, has been inadequately addressed in Ethiopia, resulting in gaps in addressing misconduct like plagiarism, falsification and fabrication. The aim of this study was to assess the magnitude and factors associated with research misconduct at a public university in Ethiopia.

Methods: An institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted on a random sample of researchers. Data were collected via a self-administered, structured questionnaire, which was adapted from a similar study. The collected data were analysed using descriptive, bivariate, and multivariable logistic regression.

Result: A total of 244 researchers participated in the study, resulting in an 82% response rate. In our study, 37.7% of participants reported engaging in at least one form of misconduct, 95% CI [31.6%, 44.1%]. Authorship misconduct was the most common form of self-reported misconduct (47.5%), 95% CI [41.1%, 54.0%], followed by fabrication and falsification (40.6%), 95% CI [34.4%, 47.0%]. Publication pressure was significantly associated with research misconduct (AOR = 3.18; 95% CI: [1.02, 9.95]).

Conclusion: This study highlights the prevalence of research misconduct and questionable research practices among academic researchers, with authorship misconduct, fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism being the most commonly reported types. Attitudes toward research misconduct and self-reported involvement were influenced by academic position, research experience, and publication pressure, with junior researchers being more likely to report engaging in misbehavior. While ethics training has occasionally been associated with reduced rates of research misconduct, its effectiveness remains uncertain, as institutional culture, supervision, and mentorship may play a more significant role. Addressing research misconduct requires a comprehensive approach that extends beyond ethical instruction, incorporating targeted support for early-career researchers, open dialogue, and institutional policy reforms.