Publish or be ethical? Publishing pressure and scientific misconduct in research

Datos Bibliográficos

ID21787634
AutoresMariola Paruzel-Czachura (0000-0002-8716-9778, University of Silesia in Katowice, autor de correspondencia), Lidia Baran (0000-0002-3118-1997, University of Silesia in Katowice), Zbigniew Spendel (University of Silesia in Katowice)
Año2021
Volumen17
Número3
Páginas375-397
Fecha de publicación2021-07-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaResearch Ethics (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 1747-0161 • E-ISSN: 2047-6094
EditorialSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/1747016120980562
OpenAlexW3112308757
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas16
Referencias citadas50

The paper reports two studies exploring the relationship between scholars’ self-reported publication pressure and their self-reported scientific misconduct in research. In Study 1 the participants ( N = 423) were scholars representing various disciplines from one big university in Poland. In Study 2 the participants ( N = 31) were exclusively members of the management, such as dean, director, etc. from the same university. In Study 1 the most common reported form of scientific misconduct was honorary authorship. The majority of researchers (71%) reported that they had not violated ethical standards in the past; 3% admitted to scientific misconduct; 51% reported being were aware of colleagues’ scientific misconduct. A small positive correlation between perceived publication pressure and intention to engage in scientific misconduct in the future was found. In Study 2 more than half of the management (52%) reported being aware of researchers’ dishonest practices, the most frequent one of these being honorary authorship. As many as 71% of the participants report observing publication pressure in their subordinates. The primary conclusions are: (1) most scholars are convinced of their morality and predict that they will behave morally in the future; (2) scientific misconduct, particularly minor offenses such as honorary authorship, is frequently observed both by researchers (particularly in their colleagues) and by their managers; (3) researchers experiencing publication pressure report a willingness to engage in scientific misconduct in the future

Alternative medicine · Misconduct · Morality · Political science · Psychiatry · Public relations · Publication · Publishing · Research ethics · Research integrity · Scientific Misconduct · Academic integrity and plagiarism · Ethics in Business and Education · Law · Medicine · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment