A phenomenographic study of scientists’ beliefs about the causes of scientists’ research misconduct

Datos Bibliográficos

ID21787629
AutoresAidan C Cairns (0000-0002-6192-5942), Caleb L Linville (0000-0003-1752-0638), Caleb Linville, Tyler Garcia (0000-0003-0078-0134), Bill Bridges (0000-0003-3319-5353), Scott Tanona (0000-0002-3344-7429, Kansas State University), Jonathan Herington (0000-0002-9507-8331, University of Rochester, autor de correspondencia), James T Laverty (0000-0001-5788-8539, Kansas State University)
Año2021
Volumen17
Número4
Páginas501-521
Fecha de publicación2021-10-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaResearch Ethics (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1747-0161 • E-ISSN: 2047-6094
EditorialSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/17470161211042658
OpenAlexW3196723441
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas5
Referencias citadas30

When scientists act unethically, their actions can cause harm to participants, undermine knowledge creation, and discredit the scientific community. Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) training is one of the main ways institutions try to prevent scientists from acting unethically. However, this only addresses the problem if scientists value the training, and if the problem stems from ignorance. This study looks at what scientists think causes unethical behavior in science, with the hopes of improving RCR training by shaping it based on the views of the targeted audience ( n = 14 scientists). Previous studies have surveyed scientists about what they believe causes unethical behavior using pre-defined response items. This study uses a qualitative research methodology to elicit scientists’ beliefs without predefining the range of responses. The data for this phenomenographic study were collected from interviews which presented ethical case studies and asked subjects how they would respond to those situations. Categories and subcategories were created to organize their reasonings. This work will inform the development of future methods for preventing unethical behavior in research

Alternative medicine · Engineering ethics · Harm · Ignorance · Misconduct · Political science · Public relations · Qualitative research · Research ethics · Scientific Misconduct · Social science · Sociology · Academic integrity and plagiarism · Computer Science · Engineering · Ethics in Business and Education · Ethics in medical practice · Law · Medicine · Psychology · Social Psychology