Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance最新文献_第10页

The justified limits of transparency in research misconduct reports. 研究不端行为报告透明度的合理限制。

IF 4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-21 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2495790

Elisa Reverman

{"title":"The justified limits of transparency in research misconduct reports.","authors":"Elisa Reverman","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2495790","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2495790","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I explore the idea of increased transparency in the context of research misconduct. I begin with a brief introduction of how increased transparency across the research enterprise has gained momentum and shepherded in the current Open Science movement. I then introduce general endorsements for greater transparency within research misconduct, which propose that increased transparency will achieve a range of aims. Using existing taxonomies of transparency, I break these general endorsements down into more specific mechanisms of transparency, and in doing so exhibit the wide range of forms and structures that transparency can take. Following this, I argue that while transparency for purposes such as quality improvement or third-party auditing may be justifiable, public-facing transparency for the purposes of trust-building and accountability generates unique concerns and requires more evidence to justify. In detailing these concerns, I argue for greater caution and consideration of the epistemic and practical effects of public transparency with research misconduct reports and point out a disanalogy between Open Science and matters of research misconduct. I ultimately conclude that research misconduct proceedings and reports ought not default to public-facing transparency without further evidence to support that such an effort would achieve their intended aims.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"2495790"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144047041","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Induced citation analysis: Development and application of a measurement instrument in a systematic review on role-playing games. 引证分析：一种用于角色扮演游戏系统评价的测量工具的开发与应用。

IF 4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-23 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2495287

Cecilia Rollano, Juan-Carlos Pérez-González, Marcos Román-González

{"title":"Induced citation analysis: Development and application of a measurement instrument in a systematic review on role-playing games.","authors":"Cecilia Rollano, Juan-Carlos Pérez-González, Marcos Román-González","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2495287","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2495287","url":null,"abstract":"Background: The pressure to publish and the dynamics of academic publishing have increased the prevalence of paper mills, citation sales, plagiarism, and academic post-truth, posing a risk to academic integrity.Objective: The aim of this study is to develop and validate the induced citation checklist to measure the risks introduced by key citations. Methods. To develop this tool, key citations were extracted from a systematic review of role-playing games. An inductive and iterative thematic analysis was performed on these citations. The checklist was applied, and the results were summarized in the induced citation graph.Results: The final product, the induced citation checklist, contains five categories, and its application identified widespread issues with citation practices. The most common problem was a lack of 20 empirical foundation. Meanwhile, the induced citation graph provides an intuitive summary of the of the results.Conclusion: This study highlights the need to consider the biases introduced through citations. In this regard, the induced citation checklist is presented as a valuable tool for improving academic integrity and research practices, and it is simple to apply. The applicability of the checklist extends beyond role-playing games and systematic reviews; therefore, future research should expand its validation across different disciplines.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"2495287"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144063038","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The politicization of retraction. 撤稿政治化。

IF 4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-28 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2498428

Samuel V Bruton

引用次数: 0

An overview of studies assessing predatory journals within the biomedical sciences. 生物医学领域掠夺性期刊评估研究综述。

IF 4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-24 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2465625

Felix Althaus, Carla Brigitte Susan Kohl, Clovis Mariano Faggion

{"title":"An overview of studies assessing predatory journals within the biomedical sciences.","authors":"Felix Althaus, Carla Brigitte Susan Kohl, Clovis Mariano Faggion","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2465625","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2465625","url":null,"abstract":"Objective: The proliferation of predatory journals (PJs) poses challenges to the integrity and reliability of scientific research. This study provides a comprehensive overview of studies assessing predatory practices in the biomedical sciences and the evaluation of their methodologies.Methods: We systematically searched three databases: PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus. We included review-type studies published in English that assessed PJs within biomedical fields. We analyzed the characteristics of PJs, and methodological quality using the advice of \"a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews\" (AMSTAR-2) and the Cochrane Handbook.Results: Fifty articles were included in the analysis. The first review of PJs was published in 2015. More than 80% of the reviews were published from 2018 onwards. The studies most often focused on the lack of an adequate peer review process (33/50), time to publication (30/50), and level of article processing charge (27/50). Concerning methodological quality, none of the studies fulfilled all the suggested items; 30 of the studies did not meet any of them.Conclusions: The methodological quality of the existing reviews was rather low, and the results of the present study may help researchers improve the methodological quality of future reviews on this topic.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"2465625"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143494471","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Comparing the performance of Retraction Watch Database, PubMed, and Web of Science in identifying retracted publications in medicine. 比较撤稿观察数据库、PubMed和Web of Science在识别医学撤稿出版物方面的表现。

IF 4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-29 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2484555

Paul Sebo, Melissa Sebo

{"title":"Comparing the performance of Retraction Watch Database, PubMed, and Web of Science in identifying retracted publications in medicine.","authors":"Paul Sebo, Melissa Sebo","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2484555","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2484555","url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To compare the performance of Retraction Watch Database (RWD), PubMed, and Web of Science (WoS) in identifying retracted publications (RP) in medicine.Methods: This cross-sectional study analyzed RP in 131 high-impact journals spanning nine disciplines: anesthesiology, dermatology, general internal medicine, gynecology/obstetrics, neurology, oncology, pediatrics, psychiatry, and radiology. Using RWD, PubMed, and WoS, we retrieved all publications that were retracted in these journals. The total number of RP was defined as the combined count across the three databases. We calculated the proportion of RP retrieved by each database overall, by journal, and by discipline.Results: A total of 878 RP were identified. Anesthesiology accounted for the most RP (n = 382), followed by general internal medicine (n = 125) and gynecology/obstetrics (n = 116). RWD retrieved the highest number (815; 92.8%), followed by PubMed (758; 86.3%) and WoS (734; 83.6%). Performance varied across disciplines: RWD captured 75-99%, PubMed 52-97%, and WoS 58-96%. RWD outperformed the others in eight of nine disciplines; the exception was gynecology/obstetrics, where PubMed performed better.Conclusion: RWD demonstrated superior coverage compared to PubMed and WoS, though performance varied by discipline. Combining databases offers a more comprehensive approach to retraction identification.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"2484555"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143744366","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Outcomes of faculty training aimed at improving how allegations of research misconduct are handled. 教师培训的结果，旨在改善如何处理研究不当行为的指控。

IF 4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-20 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2468964

Courtney Karmelita, Bridget Carruthers, Sanjana Gautam, Amanda Ferrara

引用次数: 0

A study on ethical review processes of local ethics committees for animal experimentation in Türkiye. 地方伦理委员会对<s:1>基耶病毒动物实验的伦理审查程序研究。

IF 4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-06 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2487502

Burcu Erdoğan Boz, R Tamay Başağaç Gül

{"title":"A study on ethical review processes of local ethics committees for animal experimentation in Türkiye.","authors":"Burcu Erdoğan Boz, R Tamay Başağaç Gül","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2487502","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2487502","url":null,"abstract":"Background: In Türkiye, as in other countries, ethical committee approval is mandatory for all animal experimentation. While legal regulations provide a framework for these committees, they often lack specific guidance for studies conducted outside of laboratory settings or involving non-laboratory animals. This deficiency, coupled with variations in committee composition and insufficient expertise among members, frequently results in inconsistent evaluations of similar research proposals.Objective: This study aims to investigate inconsistencies in ethical evaluations of animal research proposals by local ethics committees for animal experimentation and identify weaknesses in the current approval process.Methods: To assess the issue, five hypothetical projects-involving Merino sheep, Ankara goats, Hatay mountain gazelles, domestic cats, and animal tissues-were submitted to 37 randomly selected ethics committees. The feedback received was analysed to identify inconsistencies and areas of weakness.Results: The analysis revealed significant challenges in the evaluation of projects requiring project-based approval, those involving regulated procedures, wild species, multi-center studies, and animal tissues. Many committees demonstrated an inadequate understanding of relevant legislation, species-specific considerations, and procedures performed outside laboratories.Conclusion: This lack of standardization and carelessness in evaluations underscore the urgent need for enhanced training and more stringent guidelines for ethics committee members. The article concludes with proposed solutions aimed at standardizing project evaluation processes and improving the consistency and quality of ethical review.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"2487502"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143797017","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Mitigating global climate change and its environmental impact is a key social responsibility of scientists and should be part of research ethics policies and guidelines. 减缓全球气候变化及其对环境的影响是科学家的一项关键社会责任，应该成为研究伦理政策和指导方针的一部分。

IF 4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-17 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2479494

Bor Luen Tang

{"title":"Mitigating global climate change and its environmental impact is a key social responsibility of scientists and should be part of research ethics policies and guidelines.","authors":"Bor Luen Tang","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2479494","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2479494","url":null,"abstract":"Scientists have both epistemic and social responsibilities. Doing good science and reproducible research work would be a scientist's epistemic responsibility, but what might constitute social responsibility is perhaps broader and more subjective. Here, I posit that mitigation of global climate change (CC) and its environmental impact would be a key contemporary social responsibility of scientists. In their research, diligence in reducing the contribution of their work to greenhouse gas emissions and CC would be morally normative. Furthermore, contributing to tackling CC and its detrimental effects would be befitting of scientists' technical expertise, and is thus an appropriate reciprocative return for the training and resources afforded to them by society (and the environment). Scientists being responsible for tackling CC and its effects can be adequately described by the terms of dimensions of responsibility alluded to by de Melo-Martin and Intemann. As such, there would be no convincing reasons to reject these as important notions that should be incorporated into research ethics guidelines and policies.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"2479494"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143651872","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Mapping nine decades of research integrity studies (1935-2024): A scientometric analysis. 绘制90年的科研诚信研究（1935-2024）：科学计量学分析。

IF 4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-03-13 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2470860

Gengyan Tang

{"title":"Mapping nine decades of research integrity studies (1935-2024): A scientometric analysis.","authors":"Gengyan Tang","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2470860","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2470860","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Research integrity is fundamental to responsible research practice. Despite attention, the intellectual structure and evolution of this field remains underexplored. This study maps the knowledge landscape of research integrity, identifying key themes, contributions, and trends.Methods: A scientometric analysis was conducted on 6,895 records from Web of Science and Scopus (1935-2024). CiteSpace facilitated network analysis, including co-authorship, keyword co-occurrence, and co-citation patterns, while burst detection identified topics.Results: Research integrity studies have grown significantly since the 1980s, with interdisciplinary collaboration. Keyword and co-citation analyses reveal a shift from early discussions on scientific misconduct to concerns such as open science, AI ethics, and research governance. A collaboration network has emerged, with leading contributions from North America, Europe, and Asia.Conclusions: Research integrity has matured into an interdisciplinary field, reaching academic consensus with growing integration of policies, regulations, and technology. Future research is expected to focus on AI's role in research integrity. Key areas of concern include algorithmic bias, automation ethics, and implications for scholarly publishing. Open science and transparency will remain central, particularly in addressing data fabrication, paper mills, and predatory publishing. Institutional policies will continue evolving, embedding integrity principles into governance and public engagement initiatives.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"2470860"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143626773","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Perceptions of Arab researchers regarding publishing scientific research: A cross-sectional study. 阿拉伯研究人员对发表科学研究的看法：一项横断面研究。

IF 4.4 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2026-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-04-21 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2489544

Mamoun Ahram, Ahmed Samir Abdelhafiz, Zeinab Mohammed, Samar Abd ElHafeez, Alya Elgamri, Karima El Rhazi, Henry J Silverman

{"title":"Perceptions of Arab researchers regarding publishing scientific research: A cross-sectional study.","authors":"Mamoun Ahram, Ahmed Samir Abdelhafiz, Zeinab Mohammed, Samar Abd ElHafeez, Alya Elgamri, Karima El Rhazi, Henry J Silverman","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2489544","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2489544","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) confront multifactorial challenges when publishing their manuscripts. Here, we aimed to quantify Arab researchers' perceptions of these challenges.Materials and methods: We distributed an online questionnaire to Arab researchers from 17 countries, the majority of which were LMICs.Results: Among 286 respondents, 71.7% experienced rejection of at least one manuscript. The main reasons for manuscript rejection included being outside the journals' scopes (46.1%) and lacking novelty (35.1%). Over one-third of the respondents believed they might have faced bias in the review process being of Arab origin. More than 60% thought a Western coauthor would make their manuscripts be reviewed more favorably. Moreover, 60% thought it would be easier to publish in open-access journals. Over 75% of our respondents were aware of predatory journals, and an alarming 17.1% published in such journals.Conclusion: To improve the quality of scholarly publications and address publishing challenges, we propose strengthening research training, enhancing language support, and increasing the representation of LMIC researchers in editorial roles. These measures aim to foster inclusivity in peer review and ensure a more diverse academic publishing landscape.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"2489544"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4,"publicationDate":"2026-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392153/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144047038","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0