Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance最新文献_第2页

The definition of research misconduct should be stated in the abstract when reporting research on research misconduct. 在报告有关研究不当行为的研究时，应在摘要中说明研究不当行为的定义。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-24 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2024.2306538

Rafael Dal-Ré, Ana Marušić

{"title":"The definition of research misconduct should be stated in the abstract when reporting research on research misconduct.","authors":"Rafael Dal-Ré, Ana Marušić","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2024.2306538","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2024.2306538","url":null,"abstract":"Research integrity is the cornerstone for a reliable and trustworthy science. Research misconduct is classically defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism. To be considered as such, the action must have been committed with the intent to mislead or deceive. There are many other research misbehaviors such as duplication, fake-peer review or lack of disclosure of conflicts of interest, that are often included in the definition of research misconduct in codes, policies, and professional documents. The definition of research misconduct varies among countries and institutions, the seriousness and intentionality of the action. This variability is also present in research articles on the prevalence of research misconduct because it is common for each author to use a different definition, creating confusion for readers. We argue that the definition of research misconduct used in a study should be stated already in the abstract, particularly because not all publications are in open access, so that readers can fully understand what the study found concerning research misconduct without needing to have access to the full article.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"639-647"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139543319","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

"Dear Editor, may I speak with you?" “亲爱的编辑，我能和你谈谈吗？”

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-04-30 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2499639

Clovis Mariano Faggion

{"title":"\"Dear Editor, may I speak with you?\"","authors":"Clovis Mariano Faggion","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2499639","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2025.2499639","url":null,"abstract":"The role of the editor-in-chief, or sometimes an associate editor, is pivotal in determining the fate of a manuscript submitted for publication in scientific journals. This decision-making process should involve a willingness to engage in discussions regarding the outcomes of submitted works. Many journals explicitly outline in their submission guidelines that once a decision on manuscript rejection is made, that decision is final and cannot be appealed by the authors. This policy can create a significant barrier for authors seeking clarity or reconsideration. Moreover, several journals impose limits on the number of rounds of review during the peer-review process. These restrictions can significantly diminish the authors' chances to thoroughly address the reviewers' comments and opinions, potentially overlooking valuable feedback that could enhance the quality of their work. This commentary advocates for a paradigm shift in how editors handle communications with authors during the peer review process. It emphasizes the need for a more flexible and open approach, where editors foster a dialogue with authors about their submissions. Such open lines of communication are crucial for cultivating a fair and transparent peer-review experience that benefits all parties involved, ultimately leading to higher-quality published research.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1-6"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144057386","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 2.8 1区哲学

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

Samuel V Bruton

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 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub 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":"https://doi.org/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":"1-15"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-04-23","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 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 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub 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":"https://doi.org/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":"1-20"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-04-21","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

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 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub 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":"https://doi.org/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":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","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":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Perceptions of network-level ethics in an engineering research center: Analysis of ethical issues & practices reported by scientific & engineering participants. 工程研究中心对网络层面伦理的认知：科学与工程参与者报告的伦理问题与实践分析。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-04-16 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2491106

Gillian Roehrig, Shuvra Rahman, Timothy Pruett, Korkut Uygun, Susan Wolf

{"title":"Perceptions of network-level ethics in an engineering research center: Analysis of ethical issues & practices reported by scientific & engineering participants.","authors":"Gillian Roehrig, Shuvra Rahman, Timothy Pruett, Korkut Uygun, Susan Wolf","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2491106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2025.2491106","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Despite the rise of big-team science and multi-institutional, multidisciplinary research networks, little research has explored the unique challenges that large, distributed research networks face in ensuring the ethical and responsible conduct of research (RCR) at the network level.Methods: This qualitative case study explored the views of the scientists, engineers, clinicians, and trainees within a large Engineering Research Center (ERC) on ethical and RCR issues arising at the network level.Results: Semi-structured interviews of 26 ERC members were analyzed and revealed five major themes: (1) data sharing, (2) authorship or inventorship credit, (3) ethics and regulation, (4) collaboration, and (5) network leadership, norms, and policy. Interviews revealed cross-laboratory differences and disciplinary differences as sources of challenge.Conclusions: This study illuminates ethical challenges that a large, multi-institutional research network is likely to face. Research collaboration across disciplines, laboratories, and institutions invites conflict over norms and practices. Network leadership requires anticipating, monitoring, and addressing the ethical challenges in order to ensure the network's ethical and responsible conduct of research and optimize research collaboration. Studying perceived ethical issues that arise at the meso-level of a research network is essential for understanding how to advance network ethics.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1-22"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144042838","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

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 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub 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":"https://doi.org/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":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-04-06","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

Governance of research and product improvement studies in consumer mental health apps. Interviews with researchers and app developers. 消费者心理健康应用程序中的研究治理和产品改进研究。对研究人员和应用程序开发人员的采访。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-18 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2281548

Kamiel Verbeke, Charu Jain, Ambra Shpendi, Pascal Borry

{"title":"Governance of research and product improvement studies in consumer mental health apps. Interviews with researchers and app developers.","authors":"Kamiel Verbeke, Charu Jain, Ambra Shpendi, Pascal Borry","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2281548","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2281548","url":null,"abstract":"Consumer mental health apps (MHAs) collect and generate mental health-related data on their users, which can be leveraged for research and product improvement studies. Such studies are associated with ethical issues that may be difficult for researchers and app developers to assess. To improve ethical study conduct, governance through rules, agreements and customs could be relied upon, but their translation into practice is subject to barriers. This qualitative interview study with 17 researchers and app developers looked into the role and impact of governance standards on consumer MHA studies. Interviewees experienced a significant number of rules, agreements and customs, although not all of the governance standards that can potentially be applicable. Standards did have an impact on the interests of researchers and app developers, app users and society, but this impact was mediated by several barriers related to their conceptualization and implementation. Conceptualization barriers impacted the development of a standard, the inclusion of relevant concepts and the coordination between standards. Implementation barriers concerned the resource cost of understanding a standard, as well as suboptimal enforcement. The framework developed in this study can support more effective efforts to improve the governance of future consumer MHA studies.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"341-368"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"71523307","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

Developing faculty research mentors: Influence of experience with diverse mentees, gender, and mentorship training. 发展教师研究导师:不同学员、性别和导师培训经验的影响。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-18 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2280234

Louie C Alexander, Elise Demeter, Katherine Hall-Hertel, Lisa M Rasmussen

{"title":"Developing faculty research mentors: Influence of experience with diverse mentees, gender, and mentorship training.","authors":"Louie C Alexander, Elise Demeter, Katherine Hall-Hertel, Lisa M Rasmussen","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2280234","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2280234","url":null,"abstract":"Effective mentoring is crucial for early-career researchers, and formal mentor training programs have demonstrated benefits for participating faculty. To determine how mentor training generalizes to different contexts and populations, we delivered mentor training and evaluated its impact on faculty's self-perceived mentoring skills. We also assessed whether mentor experience with diverse mentee populations or mentor gender influences mentors' self-perceived skills and if training interacted with these self-perceptions. We found mentors with more experience with diverse mentees were more likely to rate their mentoring skills higher than mentors with less experience across most areas assessed. Women rated themselves more highly than men at addressing diversity within the mentoring relationship. Mentors with less experience with diverse mentees gained the most training-related benefits in fostering independence skills. Training improved faculty self-perceived mentoring skills in all areas assessed. These results suggest while mentor training can benefit all involved, it can be especially useful for those newer to mentoring.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"318-340"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89720360","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