医科大学教师对学术骚扰认知的量表开发

Q3 Medicine
Toru Nagasawa, Kyoko Nomura, Shinichi Takenoshita, Haruko Hiraike, Akiko Tsuchiya, Takayoshi Ohkubo, Hiroko Okinaga
{"title":"医科大学教师对学术骚扰认知的量表开发","authors":"Toru Nagasawa,&nbsp;Kyoko Nomura,&nbsp;Shinichi Takenoshita,&nbsp;Haruko Hiraike,&nbsp;Akiko Tsuchiya,&nbsp;Takayoshi Ohkubo,&nbsp;Hiroko Okinaga","doi":"10.1265/jjh.18033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In academia, harassment may often occur and remain unrevealed in Japan, which discourages young researchers from pursuing their career. It is necessary to estimate and improve the perception of \"academic harassment\" among university faculties. Therefore, in this study, we aim to develop a scale of perception of academic harassment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prior to a quantitative survey, a task team consisting of medical doctors, researchers, nurses, hospital workers, and managers in general affairs division identified 36 items related to academic harassment. In February 2016, we sent a self-administered questionnaire to 1,126 academic faculty members who worked in a medical university located in Tokyo, Japan. We instructed them to score the extent to which they consider each item as related to academic harassment based on a Likert scale. We carried out maximum likelihood factor analyses with promax rotation and computed Cronbach's alpha to develop a scale and investigate the reliability of the scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 377 returned the questionnaires (response rate, 33.5%; male, 73.8%). In factor analyses, we removed 17 items owing to low factor loadings, and four factors were eventually extracted. The first factor was termed \"Harassment in organization (7 items)\" because it included conditions of forcing a particular person to work on chores or lectures for students that may prevent one's academic research outputs. The second factor was termed \"Violence and denying personal character (4 items)\". The third factor was termed \"Research misconduct (5 items)\" including conditions of excluding a particular person from the coauthor list of research outputs or pressuring a person to fabricate, falsify, or plagiarize research outputs. The fourth factor was termed \"Research interference (3 items)\" including a condition of interference with conference attendance. Cronbach's alpha values of these four factors ranged from 0.83 to 0.91, suggesting that the scale had high reliability. The means of these factors did not differ according to gender but were higher in participants aged 50 or older than in younger participants.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results suggest that the scale of perception on academic harassment consisting of four factors with 19 items is valid and reliable to some extent.</p>","PeriodicalId":35643,"journal":{"name":"Japanese Journal of Hygiene","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1265/jjh.18033","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Scale Development on Perception of Academic Harassment among Medical University Faculties].\",\"authors\":\"Toru Nagasawa,&nbsp;Kyoko Nomura,&nbsp;Shinichi Takenoshita,&nbsp;Haruko Hiraike,&nbsp;Akiko Tsuchiya,&nbsp;Takayoshi Ohkubo,&nbsp;Hiroko Okinaga\",\"doi\":\"10.1265/jjh.18033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>In academia, harassment may often occur and remain unrevealed in Japan, which discourages young researchers from pursuing their career. It is necessary to estimate and improve the perception of \\\"academic harassment\\\" among university faculties. Therefore, in this study, we aim to develop a scale of perception of academic harassment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Prior to a quantitative survey, a task team consisting of medical doctors, researchers, nurses, hospital workers, and managers in general affairs division identified 36 items related to academic harassment. In February 2016, we sent a self-administered questionnaire to 1,126 academic faculty members who worked in a medical university located in Tokyo, Japan. We instructed them to score the extent to which they consider each item as related to academic harassment based on a Likert scale. We carried out maximum likelihood factor analyses with promax rotation and computed Cronbach's alpha to develop a scale and investigate the reliability of the scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 377 returned the questionnaires (response rate, 33.5%; male, 73.8%). In factor analyses, we removed 17 items owing to low factor loadings, and four factors were eventually extracted. The first factor was termed \\\"Harassment in organization (7 items)\\\" because it included conditions of forcing a particular person to work on chores or lectures for students that may prevent one's academic research outputs. The second factor was termed \\\"Violence and denying personal character (4 items)\\\". The third factor was termed \\\"Research misconduct (5 items)\\\" including conditions of excluding a particular person from the coauthor list of research outputs or pressuring a person to fabricate, falsify, or plagiarize research outputs. The fourth factor was termed \\\"Research interference (3 items)\\\" including a condition of interference with conference attendance. Cronbach's alpha values of these four factors ranged from 0.83 to 0.91, suggesting that the scale had high reliability. The means of these factors did not differ according to gender but were higher in participants aged 50 or older than in younger participants.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results suggest that the scale of perception on academic harassment consisting of four factors with 19 items is valid and reliable to some extent.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35643,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Japanese Journal of Hygiene\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1265/jjh.18033\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Japanese Journal of Hygiene\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1265/jjh.18033\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Japanese Journal of Hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1265/jjh.18033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目标:在学术界,骚扰可能经常发生,并且在日本仍然没有被揭露,这阻碍了年轻研究人员追求他们的事业。有必要评估和改善大学教师对“学术骚扰”的认知。因此,在本研究中,我们的目标是开发一个学术骚扰感知量表。方法:在进行定量调查之前,由医生、研究人员、护士、医院工作人员和综合科管理人员组成的任务小组确定了与学术骚扰有关的36个项目。2016年2月,我们向位于日本东京的一所医科大学的1126名教员发送了一份自我管理的问卷。我们指示他们根据李克特量表对他们认为每个项目与学术骚扰相关的程度进行评分。我们进行了最大似然因子分析,并计算了Cronbach's alpha,以开发量表并调查量表的可靠性。结果:共回收问卷377份,回复率33.5%;男性,73.8%)。在因子分析中,由于因子负荷低,我们删除了17个项目,最终提取了4个因素。第一个因素被称为“组织骚扰(7项)”,因为它包括强迫某个人做家务或为学生讲课,这可能会妨碍他的学术研究成果。第二个因素被称为“暴力和否认人格(4项)”。第三个因素被称为“研究不端行为(5项)”,包括将特定人员排除在研究成果的共同作者名单之外,或迫使某人捏造、伪造或剽窃研究成果。第四个因素被称为“研究干扰(3项)”,包括干扰会议出席的条件。这四个因素的Cronbach’s alpha值在0.83 ~ 0.91之间,表明量表具有较高的信度。这些因素的平均值没有因性别而异,但在50岁或以上的参与者中高于年轻参与者。结论:研究结果表明,由4个因素组成的学术骚扰感知量表具有一定的效度和信度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
[Scale Development on Perception of Academic Harassment among Medical University Faculties].

Objectives: In academia, harassment may often occur and remain unrevealed in Japan, which discourages young researchers from pursuing their career. It is necessary to estimate and improve the perception of "academic harassment" among university faculties. Therefore, in this study, we aim to develop a scale of perception of academic harassment.

Methods: Prior to a quantitative survey, a task team consisting of medical doctors, researchers, nurses, hospital workers, and managers in general affairs division identified 36 items related to academic harassment. In February 2016, we sent a self-administered questionnaire to 1,126 academic faculty members who worked in a medical university located in Tokyo, Japan. We instructed them to score the extent to which they consider each item as related to academic harassment based on a Likert scale. We carried out maximum likelihood factor analyses with promax rotation and computed Cronbach's alpha to develop a scale and investigate the reliability of the scale.

Results: In total, 377 returned the questionnaires (response rate, 33.5%; male, 73.8%). In factor analyses, we removed 17 items owing to low factor loadings, and four factors were eventually extracted. The first factor was termed "Harassment in organization (7 items)" because it included conditions of forcing a particular person to work on chores or lectures for students that may prevent one's academic research outputs. The second factor was termed "Violence and denying personal character (4 items)". The third factor was termed "Research misconduct (5 items)" including conditions of excluding a particular person from the coauthor list of research outputs or pressuring a person to fabricate, falsify, or plagiarize research outputs. The fourth factor was termed "Research interference (3 items)" including a condition of interference with conference attendance. Cronbach's alpha values of these four factors ranged from 0.83 to 0.91, suggesting that the scale had high reliability. The means of these factors did not differ according to gender but were higher in participants aged 50 or older than in younger participants.

Conclusions: The results suggest that the scale of perception on academic harassment consisting of four factors with 19 items is valid and reliable to some extent.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Japanese Journal of Hygiene
Japanese Journal of Hygiene Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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