What Research Institutions Can Do to Foster Research Integrity

Bibliographic Data

ID21688339
AuthorsL M Bouter (0000-0002-2659-5482, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, corresponding author)
Year2020
Volume26
Issue4
Pages2363-2369
Publication date2020-08-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueScience and Engineering Ethics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1353-3452 • E-ISSN: 1471-5546
PublisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1007/s11948-020-00178-5
PMID31965429
OpenAlexW3001394057
LanguageEN
Citations received19
References cited13

In many countries attention for fostering research integrity started with a misconduct case that got a lot of media exposure. But there is an emerging consensus that questionable research practices are more harmful due to their high prevalence. QRPs have in common that they can help to make study results more exciting, more positive and more statistically significant. That makes them tempting to engage in. Research institutions have the duty to empower their research staff to steer away from QRPs and to explain how they realize that in a Research Integrity Promotion Plan. Avoiding perverse incentives in assessing researchers for career advancement is an important element in that plan. Research institutions, funding agencies and journals should make their research integrity policies as evidence-based as possible. The dilemmas and distractions researchers face are real and universal. We owe it to society to collaborate and to do our utmost best to prevent QRPs and to foster research integrity

Alternative medicine · Business · Commit · Duty · Engineering ethics · Incentive · Misconduct · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Research ethics · Research integrity · Scientific Misconduct · Sociology · Academic integrity and plagiarism · Computer Science · Engineering · Ethics in Clinical Research · Law · Medicine

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access