发布求助
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance最新文献

筛选
英文 中文
'I don't believe in the neutrality of research. OK?' Mapping researchers' attitudes toward values in science. 我不相信研究的中立性。好吗？研究人员对科学价值的态度。
IF 2.8 1区 哲学
Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-02 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2024.2423358
Jacopo Ambrosj, Hugh Desmond, Kris Dierickx
{"title":"'I don't believe in the neutrality of research. OK?' Mapping researchers' attitudes toward values in science.","authors":"Jacopo Ambrosj, Hugh Desmond, Kris Dierickx","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2024.2423358","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2024.2423358","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>: Codes of conduct for research integrity provide ambivalent guidance on the role that the values of society as well as political and economic interests can or should play in scientific research. The development of clearer guidance on this matter in the future should consider the attitudes of researchers.<b>Methods</b>: We conducted 24 semi-structured interviews with holders of grants from the European Research Council and performed an inductive thematic analysis thereof.<b>Results</b>: We developed 4 themes reflecting 4 main attitudes of researchers toward the interactions between values and science: <i>awareness</i>, <i>concern</i>, <i>confidence</i>, and <i>embracement</i>. While interviewees recognized that science is not completely value-free (<i>awareness</i>), they still seemed to hold on to the so-called value-free ideal of science as a professional norm to minimize bias (<i>concern</i>, <i>confidence</i>). However, they showed awareness of the beneficial influence that values like diversity can have on research (<i>embracement</i>).<b>Conclusions</b>: Codes such as the <i>European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity</i> tend not to problematize the tensions that emerge from having the value-free ideal of science as a norm and being guided by the values of society. Our findings suggest the time might be ripe for research integrity codes to address more directly the value issues intrinsic to science.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1-23"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142565095","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
Does YouTube promote research ethics and conduct? A content analysis of Youtube Videos and analysis of sentiments through viewers comments. YouTube 是否促进了科研道德和行为？对 Youtube 视频的内容分析以及对观众评论的情感分析。
IF 2.8 1区 哲学
Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-24 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2192404
Lulu Rout, Praliva Priyadarsini Khilar, Bijayalaxmi Rout
{"title":"Does YouTube promote research ethics and conduct? A content analysis of Youtube Videos and analysis of sentiments through viewers comments.","authors":"Lulu Rout, Praliva Priyadarsini Khilar, Bijayalaxmi Rout","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2192404","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2192404","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>More commonly today, research ethics and misconduct are ideas that are frequently violated. The availability of information sources and the dissemination of awareness among researchers can help to reduce this kind of violation. This study highlights how YouTube can be used to promote discussions of research misconduct and ethics. The study looked into how many videos there are on research ethics and misconduct, which colleges actively provide such videos, and how satisfied viewers are with the available videos by analyzing comments. Various software tools, including Webometric Analyst, R-studio, and Microsoft Excel, were applied for data collection and analysis. On 01-24-2023, 515 videos and 6984 comments were retrieved using the correct search queries that is \"Research ethics\" OR \"Research misconduct\" OR \"Research conduct\" OR \"Scientific integrity\" OR \"Research integrity\" OR \"Scientific misconduct.\" Results indicate that 2020 was the most significant year, since the most videos (241) were posted in this year. The channels titled \"PPIRCPSC, ABRIZAH A, and ALHOORI H\" upload 10, 9, and 8 videos respectively, placing them in the first, second, and third positions. By analyzing viewer comments, it was determined that the majority of comments were favorable, indicating that viewers are generally pleased with the available videos.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1024-1043"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9166219","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
Research misconduct and questionable research practices form a continuum. 研究不当行为和有问题的研究实践是一个连续统一体。
IF 2.8 1区 哲学
Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-03 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2185141
Lex Bouter
{"title":"Research misconduct and questionable research practices form a continuum.","authors":"Lex Bouter","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2185141","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2185141","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research data mismanagement (RDMM) is a serious threat to accountability, reproducibility, and re-use of data. In a recent article in this journal, it was argued that RDMM can take two forms: intentional research misconduct or unintentional questionable research practice (QRP). I disagree because the scale for severity of consequences of research misbehavior is not bimodal. Furthermore, intentionality is difficult to prove beyond doubt and is only one of many criteria that should be taken into account when deciding on the severity of a breach of research integrity and whether a sanction is justified. Making a distinction between RDMM that is research misconduct and RDMM which not puts too much emphasis on intentionality and sanctioning. The focus should rather be on improving data management practices by preventive actions, in which research institutions should take a leading role.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1255-1259"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9385920","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
How often are replication attempts questioned? 复制尝试多久会受到质疑？
IF 2.8 1区 哲学
Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-05 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2198126
Przemysław G Hensel
{"title":"How often are replication attempts questioned?","authors":"Przemysław G Hensel","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2198126","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2198126","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Fear of retaliation from the original authors and their allies has been proposed as one of the explanations for the paucity of replications. In the current paper the frequency of negative responses to replications in psychology, and the attention such responses attract, was measured in a series of three studies. Study 1 indicates that replications do not attract more negative mentions in literature than randomly selected non-replication papers unless they are independent and failed, in which case a small increase in negative mentions was noticed, although replications with open data were less likely to attract such mentions. Moreover, no difference in attracting comments on a post-publication peer-review site between replications and non-replication papers was found. Study 2 shows that independent failed and partially successful replications are more likely to attract stand-alone replies than non-replication papers, but the risk is still small and is reduced for replications with open data. Study 3 indicates that stand-alone replies to replications attract fewer citations and readers than the replications to which they respond. I conclude that scientists' unwillingness to criticize published research, cited as one of the reasons for the paucity of replications, also benefits replicators by largely shielding their research from questioning.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1044-1061"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9602291","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 trinity of good research: Distinguishing between research integrity, ethics, and governance. 良好研究的三位一体：区分研究诚信、伦理和管理。
IF 2.8 1区 哲学
Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-25 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2239712
Simon E Kolstoe, Jonathan Pugh
{"title":"The trinity of good research: Distinguishing between research integrity, ethics, and governance.","authors":"Simon E Kolstoe, Jonathan Pugh","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2239712","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2239712","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The words integrity, ethics, and governance are used interchangeably in relation to research. This masks important differences that must be understood when trying to address concerns regarding research culture. While progress has been made in identifying negative aspects of research culture (such as inequalities in hiring/promotion, perverse incentives, etc.) and practical issues that lead to research waste (outcome reporting bias, reproducibility, etc.), the responsibility for addressing these problems can be unclear due to the complexity of the research environment. One solution is to provide a clearer distinction between the perspectives of \"Research Integrity,\" \"Research Ethics,\" and \"Research Governance.\" Here, it is proposed that Research Integrity should be understood as focused on the character of researchers, and consequently the responsibility for promoting it lies primarily with researchers themselves. This is a different perspective from Research Ethics, which is focused on judgments on the ethical acceptability of research, and should primarily be the responsibility of research ethics committees, often including input from the public as well as the research community. Finally, Research Governance focuses on legal and policy requirements, and although complementary to research integrity and ethics, is primarily the responsibility of expert research support officers with the skills and experience to address technical compliance.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1222-1241"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10101984","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
Ethical decision-making and role conflict in managing a scientific laboratory. 科学实验室管理中的道德决策和角色冲突。
IF 2.8 1区 哲学
Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-28 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2236553
David B Resnik, C Neal Stewart, Faustine Williams, Carol Thiele, Kenneth M Yamada, Kathy Barker
{"title":"Ethical decision-making and role conflict in managing a scientific laboratory.","authors":"David B Resnik, C Neal Stewart, Faustine Williams, Carol Thiele, Kenneth M Yamada, Kathy Barker","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2236553","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2236553","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Scientists who manage research laboratories often face ethical dilemmas related to conflicts between their different roles, such as researcher, mentor, entrepreneur, and manager. It is not known how often uncertainty about conflicting role obligations leads scientists to engage in unethical conduct, but this probably occurs more often than many people would like to think. In this paper, we reflect on ethical decision-making in scientific laboratory management with special attention to how different roles create conflicting obligations and expectations that may produce moral uncertainty and lead to violations of research norms, especially when combined with self-interest and other factors that increase the risk of misbehavior. We also offer some suggestions and guidance for investigators and research institutions.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1198-1221"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10822020/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9936017","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
Evolution of retracted publications in the medical sciences: Citations analysis, bibliometrics, and altmetrics trends. 医学科学领域被撤出版物的演变：引文分析、文献计量学和 Altmetrics 趋势。
IF 2.8 1区 哲学
Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-06-16 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2223996
Shahnaz Khademizadeh, Farshid Danesh, Samira Esmaeili, Brady Lund, Karen Santos-d'Amorim
{"title":"Evolution of retracted publications in the medical sciences: Citations analysis, bibliometrics, and altmetrics trends.","authors":"Shahnaz Khademizadeh, Farshid Danesh, Samira Esmaeili, Brady Lund, Karen Santos-d'Amorim","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2223996","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2223996","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We investigated reasons for retraction, pre-and post-retraction citations and Altmetrics indicators of retracted publications in the medical sciences from 2016 to 2020. Data were retrieved from Scopus (<i>n</i> = 840). The Retraction Watch database was used to identify the reasons for retraction and the time that elapsed from publication to retraction. The findings showed that intentional errors were the most prevalent reasons for retraction. China (438), the United States (130), and India (51) have the largest share of retractions. These retracted publications were cited 5,659 times in other research publications, of which 1,559 citations occurred after the retraction, which should raise concern. These retracted papers were also shared in online platforms, mainly on Twitter and by members of the general public. We recommend that the early detection of retracted papers may help to reduce the rate of citation and sharing of these publications, and minimize their negative impact.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1182-1197"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9639368","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
Why do some academics so often publish (letters) outside their field? 为什么有些学者经常在自己的领域之外发表文章（书信）？
IF 2.8 1区 哲学
Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-04 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2209909
Vladimír Naxera
{"title":"Why do some academics so often publish (letters) outside their field?","authors":"Vladimír Naxera","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2209909","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2209909","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1251-1252"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9773417","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
Letter to editor: Academic journals should clarify the proportion of NLP-generated content in papers. 致编辑的信：学术期刊应明确论文中NLP生成内容的比例。
IF 2.8 1区 哲学
Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-02-21 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2180359
Gengyan Tang
{"title":"Letter to editor: Academic journals should clarify the proportion of NLP-generated content in papers.","authors":"Gengyan Tang","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2180359","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2180359","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This letter to the editor argues that if academic journals are willing to accept papers that include NLP-generated content under certain conditions, editorial policies should clarify the proportion of NLP-generated content in the paper. Excessive use of NLP-generated content should be considered as academic misconduct.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1242-1243"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10757342","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
Fairness and COVID: Conducting research during the crisis. 公平与 COVID：在危机期间开展研究。
IF 2.8 1区 哲学
Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-14 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2023.2201442
Samuel Bruton, Stephanie Cargill, Tristan McIntosh, Alison Antes
{"title":"Fairness and COVID: Conducting research during the crisis.","authors":"Samuel Bruton, Stephanie Cargill, Tristan McIntosh, Alison Antes","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2201442","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2023.2201442","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The COVID-19 pandemic forced Principal Investigators (PIs) to make rapid and unprecedented decisions about ongoing research projects and research teams. Confronted with vague or shifting guidance from institutional administrators and public health officials, PIs nonetheless had to decide whether their projects were \"essential,\" who could conduct on-site \"essential\" research, how to continue research activities by remote means if possible, and how to safely and effectively manage personnel during the crisis. Based on both narrative comments from a federally sponsored survey of over a thousand NIH- and NSF-funded PIs and their personnel, as well as follow-up interviews with over 60 survey participants, this study examines various ways PI and institutional decisions raised issues of procedural and distributive fairness. These fairness issues include the challenge of treating research personnel fairly in light of their disparate personal circumstances and inconsistent enforcement of COVID-19-related directives. Our findings highlight aspects of fairness and equitability that all PIs and research administrators should keep in mind for when future research disruptions occur.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1062-1084"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"9292748","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
首页 上一页 下一页 尾页
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整，为了账户安全，请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
相关产品
×
本文献相关产品
联系我们：info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务，方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号：481959085
Book学术官方微信