ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)
Search
Generic filters
Exact text matches only
Search into
Filter by Categories
Research integrity
Filter by Categories
Human Research Ethics

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesPeer review

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

The State of Peer Review in Criminology: Literary Theory, Perceptions, and the Catch-22 Metaphor of Peer Review (Papers: Ethan M. Higgins | December 2017)0

Posted by Admin in on March 31, 2018
 

Abstract

Considerable theoretical and empirical attention has been devoted to the practice of peer review across various disciplines in the previous couple decades. Recently, Raymond Paternoster and Robert Brame indicated that it is necessary for criminology to follow suit and begin to provide a critical inquiry of the blind review model. Literary theory and writing studies have examined literate practices for decades and empirical research has identified that literate practices, like peer review, are interactional and co-constructed across discourse communities. The unique character of peer review in criminology remains unknown however. Discussions with 40 of criminology’s most influential scholars provides an opportunity to begin constructing a broad context of criminology’s peer review by challenging universal knowledge through individual experiences.

Higgins, E. M. (2017). “The State of Peer Review in Criminology: Literary Theory, Perceptions, and the Catch-22 Metaphor of Peer Review.” Journal of Criminal Justice Education: 1-24.
Publisher: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10511253.2017.1420809

Addressing research misconduct and detrimental research practices: current knowledge and issues (Books: NAP | 2017)0

Posted by Admin in on March 30, 2018
 

The integrity of knowledge that emerges from research is based on individual and collective adherence to core values of objectivity, honesty, openness, fairness, accountability, and stewardship. Integrity in science means that the organizations in which research is conducted encourage those involved to exemplify these values in every step of the research process. Understanding the dynamics that support – or distort – practices that uphold the integrity of research by all participants ensures that the research enterprise advances knowledge.

The 1992 report Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process evaluated issues related to scientific responsibility and the conduct of research. It provided a valuable service in describing and analyzing a very complicated set of issues, and has served as a crucial basis for thinking about research integrity for more than two decades. However, as experience has accumulated with various forms of research misconduct, detrimental research practices, and other forms of misconduct, as subsequent empirical research has revealed more about the nature of scientific misconduct, and because technological and social changes have altered the environment in which science is conducted, it is clear that the framework established more than two decades ago needs to be updated.

Responsible Science served as a valuable benchmark to set the context for this most recent analysis and to help guide the committee’s thought process. Fostering Integrity in Research identifies best practices in research and recommends practical options for discouraging and addressing research misconduct and detrimental research practices.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Addressing research misconduct and detrimental research practices: current knowledge and issues. In:  Fostering Integrity of Research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2017.
Publisher: https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21896/fostering-integrity-in-research

Optimizing the Nation’s Investment in Academic Research (Books: National Academies Press | 2016)0

Posted by Admin in on March 30, 2018
 

Research universities are critical contributors to our national research enterprise. They are the principal source of a world-class labor force and fundamental discoveries that enhance our lives and the lives of others around the world. These institutions help to create an educated citizenry capable of making informed and crucial choices as participants in a democratic society. However many are concerned that the unintended cumulative effect of federal regulations undercuts the productivity of the research enterprise and diminishes the return on the federal investment in research.

Optimizing the Nation’s Investment in Academic Research reviews the regulatory framework as it currently exists, considers specific regulations that have placed undue and often unanticipated burdens on the research enterprise, and reassesses the process by which these regulations are created, reviewed, and retired. This review is critical to strengthen the partnership between the federal government and research institutions, to maximize the creation of new knowledge and products, to provide for the effective training and education of the next generation of scholars and workers, and to optimize the return on the federal investment in research for the benefit of the American people.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Optimizing the Nation’s Investment in Academic Research: A New Regulatory Framework for the 21st Century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21824.
Publisher: https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21824/optimizing-the-nations-investment-in-academic-research-a-new-regulatory

Designing integrated research integrity training: authorship, publication, and peer review (Papers: Mark Hooper, et al)0

Posted by Admin in on March 14, 2018
 

Abstract

This paper describes the experience of an academic institution, the Queensland University of Technology (QUT), developing training courses about research integrity practices in authorship, publication, and Journal Peer Review. The importance of providing research integrity training in these areas is now widely accepted; however, it remains an open question how best to conduct this training. For this reason, it is vital for institutions, journals, and peak bodies to share learnings.

We describe how we have collaborated across our institution to develop training that supports QUT’s principles and which is in line with insights from contemporary research on best practices in learning design, universal design, and faculty involvement. We also discuss how we have refined these courses iteratively over time, and consider potential mechanisms for evaluating the effectiveness of the courses more formally.

Hooper, M., Barbour V., Walsh A.., Bradbury, S. and Jacobs J. (2018) Designing integrated research integrity training: authorship, publication, and peer review. Research Integrity and Peer Review (2018) 3:2 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0046-2
Publisher (Open Access): https://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-018-0046-2?platform=hootsuitehttps://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-018-0046-2?platform=hootsuite

0