Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance最新文献_第6页

An analysis of availability and implications of unlabeled retracted articles on Sci-Hub. Sci-Hub上未标注撤稿文章的可用性及其影响分析。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-01 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2024.2446558

Biju V V, Sanjo Jose, Franklin J, Jasimudeen S

{"title":"An analysis of availability and implications of unlabeled retracted articles on Sci-Hub.","authors":"Biju V V, Sanjo Jose, Franklin J, Jasimudeen S","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2024.2446558","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2024.2446558","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Researchers are increasingly accessing scientific articles through unauthorized websites like Sci-Hub. Sci-Hub contains retracted articles, including those which are not labelled as retracted, and this is a potential threat to academic research.Methods: This study analyses the extent of the availability of retracted articles within the Sci-Hub, particularly focusing on the presence of unlabeled retracted articles (URA) which may inadvertently be used in subsequent research, thus propagating flawed findings. The authors identified 16925 English-language research articles retracted between 2003 and 2022 indexed in the Web of Science and Scopus databases. These articles were cross-checked with Sci-Hub to ascertain whether they were appropriately labelled as retracted.Results: The investigation revealed that 84.83% of the retracted articles available on Sci-Hub do not have any indication of their retracted status. These URA could potentially be reused by researchers, unaware of their retracted status. The availability of URA in the field of health sciences is particularly high, which indicates a significant risk of their unintended use and further citation in future research.Conclusions: This study underscores the crucial need for stringent implementation of regulatory measures on retraction suggested by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) or newly published National Information Standards Organization (NISO) recommendations.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"655-674"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142916283","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

Open minds, tied hands: Awareness, behavior, and reasoning on open science and irresponsible research behavior. 开放的思想，束缚的双手：对开放科学和不负责任的研究行为的认识、行为和推理。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-03 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2457100

Wisnu Wiradhany, Farah M Djalal, Anique B H de Bruin

{"title":"Open minds, tied hands: Awareness, behavior, and reasoning on open science and irresponsible research behavior.","authors":"Wisnu Wiradhany, Farah M Djalal, Anique B H de Bruin","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2457100","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2457100","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Knowledge on Open Science Practices (OSP) has been promoted through responsible conduct of research training and the development of open science infrastructure to combat Irresponsible Research Behavior (IRB). Yet, there is limited evidence for the efficacy of OSP in minimizing IRB.Methods: We asked N=778 participants to fill in questionnaires that contain OSP and ethical reasoning vignettes, and report self-admission rates of IRB and personality traits.Results: We found that against our initial prediction, even though OSP was negatively correlated with IRB, this correlation was very weak, and upon controlling for individual differences factors, OSP neither predicted IRB nor was this relationship moderated by ethical reasoning. On the other hand, individual differences factors, namely dark personality triad, and conscientiousness and openness, contributed more to IRB than OSP knowledge.Conclusions: Our findings suggest that OSP knowledge needs to be complemented by the development of ethical virtues to encounter IRBs more effectively.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"693-716"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143082015","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

Peer reviewer fatigue, or peer reviewer refusal? 同行评审疲劳，还是同行评审拒绝？

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-17 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2463977

Kate Beecher, Joshua Wang

引用次数: 0

It takes two flints to start a fire: A focus group study into PhD supervision for responsible research. 点燃一团火需要两个火石：一个关于博士监督负责任研究的焦点小组研究。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-28 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2457584

Tamarinde Haven

{"title":"It takes two flints to start a fire: A focus group study into PhD supervision for responsible research.","authors":"Tamarinde Haven","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2457584","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2457584","url":null,"abstract":"Background: Supervision is one important means of promoting responsible research. However, what a responsible supervisor should do and how to foster a responsible supervisory climate is unclear.Methods: Between January 2023 and February 2024, I conducted 17 focus groups in The Netherlands and Denmark with 85 PhD candidates and PhD supervisors to understand what practices supervisors engage in to promote responsible conduct of research and what strategies could promote a responsible supervisory relationship.Results: Supervisors were found to promote responsible research by rigorously evaluating the relevance of studies, ensuring transparency, and taking the initiative in establishing clear authorship guidelines. They critically discussed the alignment between research questions, design, and analyses. Furthermore, supervisors implemented clear data management policies and normalized conversations about ethics. They led by example through clear and coherent writing. To foster a responsible supervisory relationship, supervisors challenged the PhD candidates' ideas and supported their decision-making processes. They were mindful of the PhD candidates' needs, tailoring the research trajectory. Supervisors also practiced self-awareness and cultivated a culture of care where every contribution was appreciated.Conclusions: The North-Western context is a major limitation. I connect these findings to established leadership theories and consider their implications for fostering responsible supervision.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"717-740"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143054099","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

Seniority, authorship order, and severity of punishment in research misconduct - shared/honorary authorships as explanations for an apparent paradox. 研究不端行为中的资历、作者顺序和惩罚的严重程度——共同作者/荣誉作者对一个明显悖论的解释。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-16 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2453851

Bor Luen Tang

引用次数: 0

Using mixed methods research to study research integrity: Current status, issues, and guidelines. 使用混合方法研究研究完整性：现状、问题和指南。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-03 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2024.2449041

Gengyan Tang

{"title":"Using mixed methods research to study research integrity: Current status, issues, and guidelines.","authors":"Gengyan Tang","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2024.2449041","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2024.2449041","url":null,"abstract":"Background: The multifaceted nature of research integrity (RI) calls for the adoption of innovative methodologies to achieve a more thorough understanding. Mixed methods research (MMR) provides a valuable framework by combining diverse data sources, enabling a more nuanced exploration of complex research questions.Methods: This paper reviews seven RI studies employing MMR to identify methodological shortcomings. It introduces key concepts and typologies of MMR and proposes actionable strategies to enhance methodological rigor and innovation.Results: The review identified three key issues in current MMR applications: 1. Insufficient articulation of methodological contributions. 2. Limited visualization of quantitative and qualitative data integration. 3. Minimal engagement with recent MMR advancements. To address these gaps, a targeted To-Do List was created, offering actionable strategies for improving methodological rigor. Additionally, underutilized MMR designs, such as convergent and exploratory sequential designs, were recommended to strengthen data synthesis and expand analytical perspectives.Conclusions: MMR provides valuable opportunities to enhance RI research. This paper offers practical guidance for adopting MMR, addressing methodological gaps, and fostering robust, integrative research practices.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"807-828"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142923963","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

Group authorship, an excellent opportunity laced with ethical, legal and technical challenges. 集体创作是一个极好的机会，同时也是道德、法律和技术方面的挑战。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-06 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2024.2322557

Mohammad Hosseini, Alex O Holcombe, Marton Kovacs, Hub Zwart, Daniel S Katz, Kristi Holmes

{"title":"Group authorship, an excellent opportunity laced with ethical, legal and technical challenges.","authors":"Mohammad Hosseini, Alex O Holcombe, Marton Kovacs, Hub Zwart, Daniel S Katz, Kristi Holmes","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2024.2322557","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2024.2322557","url":null,"abstract":"Group authorship (also known as corporate authorship, team authorship, consortium authorship) refers to attribution practices that use the name of a collective (be it team, group, project, corporation, or consortium) in the authorship byline. Data shows that group authorships are on the rise but thus far, in scholarly discussions about authorship, they have not gained much specific attention. Group authorship can minimize tensions within the group about authorship order and the criteria used for inclusion/exclusion of individual authors. However, current use of group authorships has drawbacks, such as ethical challenges associated with the attribution of credit and responsibilities, legal challenges regarding how copyrights are handled, and technical challenges related to the lack of persistent identifiers (PIDs), such as ORCID, for groups. We offer two recommendations: 1) Journals should develop and share context-specific and unambiguous guidelines for group authorship, for which they can use the four baseline requirements offered in this paper; 2) Using persistent identifiers for groups and consistent reporting of members' contributions should be facilitated through devising PIDs for groups and linking these to the ORCIDs of their individual contributors and the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) of the published item.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"762-784"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11377859/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140040812","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

Reflections on the 2024 Final Rule on Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct. 对2024年《公共卫生服务科研不端行为政策最终规定》的思考

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-28 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2025.2451168

Trisha Phillips, Jake Earl

{"title":"Reflections on the 2024 Final Rule on Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct.","authors":"Trisha Phillips, Jake Earl","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2451168","DOIUrl":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2451168","url":null,"abstract":"Background: The Office of Research Integrity (ORI) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) recently issued the 2024 Final Rule on Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct (42 CFR 93), the first major revision of the regulation in nearly twenty years. Much of the commentary published about the 2024 Final Rule has focused on its impacts on research misconduct proceedings at institutions receiving Public Health Service funding. But formally addressing research misconduct is just one part of a larger effort needed to promote research integrity and the responsible conduct of research, and the new rule has the potential to affect this larger effort.Methods: This article examines the evolution of the 2024 Final Rule and analyzes five changes with the potential to have broader impacts on cultures of research integrity at U.S. institutions. We consider changes that did and not happen in development from the 2005 Final Rule to the 2023 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) and the 2024 Final Rule.Results: We identify three changes that the research community should welcome (partnership between ORI and the regulated community, identifying potential respondents, and defining research integrity), one change of concern (redefining plagiarism), and one change that might or might not be welcome (promoting research integrity and the responsible conduct of research).Conclusions: Although there is cause for concern about some of the 2024 Final Rule's potential implications for cultures of research integrity at US institutions, the positive changes support an optimistic outlook. In the coming years, it will be critical for HHS, ORI, the research community, and other stakeholders to work hand-in-hand to build on the progress made in the 2024 Final Rule to prevent and address research misconduct as part of a comprehensive effort to promote research integrity and the responsible conduct of research.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"675-692"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143054111","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

Responding to research misconduct allegations brought against top university officials. 应对针对大学高层官员的研究不当行为指控。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-27 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2024.2321179

David B Resnik, Mohammad Hosseini, Lisa Rasmussen

引用次数: 0

Medical research without patents: It's preferable, it's profitable, and it's practicable. 没有专利的医学研究：它是可取的、有利可图的，也是切实可行的。

IF 2.8 1区哲学

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-07 DOI: 10.1080/08989621.2024.2324913

Hans Radder, Joost Smiers

引用次数: 0