小心处理：大规模学术不端行为调查中列表实验和交叉模型的实施

IF 1.1 3区社会学 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY

Field Methods Pub Date : 2021-02-03 DOI:10.1177/1525822X20985629

Julia Jerke, David Johann, H. Rauhut, K. Thomas, Antonia Velicu

{"title":"小心处理：大规模学术不端行为调查中列表实验和交叉模型的实施","authors":"Julia Jerke, David Johann, H. Rauhut, K. Thomas, Antonia Velicu","doi":"10.1177/1525822X20985629","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This research analyzes the effectiveness of the list experiment and crosswise model in measuring self-plagiarism and data manipulation. Both methods were implemented in a large-scale survey of academics on social norms and academic misconduct. As the results lend little confidence about the effectiveness of the methods, researchers are best advised to avoid them or, at best, to handle them with care.","PeriodicalId":48060,"journal":{"name":"Field Methods","volume":"34 1","pages":"69 - 81"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1525822X20985629","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Handle with Care: Implementation of the List Experiment and Crosswise Model in a Large-scale Survey on Academic Misconduct\",\"authors\":\"Julia Jerke, David Johann, H. Rauhut, K. Thomas, Antonia Velicu\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1525822X20985629\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This research analyzes the effectiveness of the list experiment and crosswise model in measuring self-plagiarism and data manipulation. Both methods were implemented in a large-scale survey of academics on social norms and academic misconduct. As the results lend little confidence about the effectiveness of the methods, researchers are best advised to avoid them or, at best, to handle them with care.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48060,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Field Methods\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"69 - 81\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-02-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1525822X20985629\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Field Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X20985629\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Field Methods","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X20985629","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 6

摘要

本研究分析了列表实验和交叉模型在测量自我剽窃和数据操纵方面的有效性。这两种方法都是在对学者进行的关于社会规范和学术不端行为的大规模调查中实施的。由于研究结果对这些方法的有效性几乎没有信心，因此最好建议研究人员避免使用这些方法，或者充其量小心处理。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Handle with Care: Implementation of the List Experiment and Crosswise Model in a Large-scale Survey on Academic Misconduct

This research analyzes the effectiveness of the list experiment and crosswise model in measuring self-plagiarism and data manipulation. Both methods were implemented in a large-scale survey of academics on social norms and academic misconduct. As the results lend little confidence about the effectiveness of the methods, researchers are best advised to avoid them or, at best, to handle them with care.

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

Field Methods Multiple-

CiteScore

2.70

自引率

5.90%

发文量

期刊介绍： Field Methods (formerly Cultural Anthropology Methods) is devoted to articles about the methods used by field wzorkers in the social and behavioral sciences and humanities for the collection, management, and analysis data about human thought and/or human behavior in the natural world. Articles should focus on innovations and issues in the methods used, rather than on the reporting of research or theoretical/epistemological questions about research. High-quality articles using qualitative and quantitative methods-- from scientific or interpretative traditions-- dealing with data collection and analysis in applied and scholarly research from writers in the social sciences, humanities, and related professions are all welcome in the pages of the journal.