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

ResourcesResearch integrity

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Quintet of study retractions rocks criminology community – Science (Dalmeet Singh Chawla | November 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on December 2, 2019
 

Criminology researchers are retracting five studies that have sparked a bitter battle over potential scientific misconduct and issues of race. The episode has riveted the criminology community—and severed a once close relationship after one of the researchers accused his former mentor of falsifying data.

On 10 November, Justin Pickett, a criminologist at the State University of New York in Albany, announced on Twitter that he and his co-authors have agreed to retract a 2011 study published in Criminology that examined public support for taking a suspect’s ethnicity into account at sentencing. Four additional disputed papers, published between 2015 and this year in the journals Criminology, Social Problems, and Law & Society Review, have been or are in the process of being be retracted with the agreement of all the authors, ScienceInsider has learned. Eric Stewart, Pickett’s former mentor and a criminologist at Florida State University (FSU) in Tallahassee, is a co-author of all five studies.

The studies being retracted cover a range of topics. Two found that the number of black people lynched in a U.S. county 100 years ago influences whether white people in the same area today perceive black people as a threat and favor harsh punishments for them. Another examined the role of social context in antiblack and anti-Latino sentiment in the U.S. criminal justice system.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

Value pluralism in research integrity (Papers: Rik Peels, et al | August 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on November 30, 2019
 

Abstract
Both scientists and society at large have rightfully become increasingly concerned about research integrity in recent decades. In response, codes of conduct for research have been developed and elaborated. We show that these codes contain substantial pluralism. First, there is metaphysical pluralism in that codes include values, norms, and virtues. Second, there is axiological pluralism, because there are different categories of values, norms, and virtues: epistemic, moral, professional, social, and legal. Within and between these different categories, norms can be incommensurable or incompatible. Codes of conduct typically do not specify how to handle situations where different norms pull in different directions. We review some attempts to develop an ordering of different sorts of norm violations based on a common measure for their seriousness. We argue that they all fail to give adequate guidance for resolving cases of incommensurable and conflicting norms. We conclude that value pluralism is inherent to codes of conduct in research integrity. The application of codes needs careful reasoning and judgment together with an intellectually humble attitude that acknowledges the inevitability of value pluralism.

Peels, R., Ridder, J., Haven, T. & Bouter, L. (2019) Value pluralism in research integrity. Research Integrity and Peer Review 4, 18 doi:10.1186/s41073-019-0076-4
Publisher (Open Access): https://researchintegrityjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s41073-019-0076-4

Examination of CIs in health and medical journals from 1976 to 2019: an observational study (Papers: Adrian Gerard Barnett, Jonathan D Wren | November 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on November 26, 2019
 

Abstract

Objectives
Previous research has shown clear biases in the distribution of published p values, with an excess below the 0.05 threshold due to a combination of p-hacking and publication bias. We aimed to examine the bias for statistical significance using published confidence intervals.

Design Observational study.

Setting
Papers published in Medline since 1976.

Participants
Over 968 000 confidence intervals extracted from abstracts and over 350 000 intervals extracted from the full-text.

Outcome measures
Cumulative distributions of lower and upper confidence interval limits for ratio estimates.

Results
We found an excess of statistically significant results with a glut of lower intervals just above one and upper intervals just below 1. These excesses have not improved in recent years. The excesses did not appear in a set of over 100 000 confidence intervals that were not subject to p-hacking or publication bias.

Conclusions
The huge excesses of published confidence intervals that are just below the statistically significant threshold are not statistically plausible. Large improvements in research practice are needed to provide more results that better reflect the truth.

Barnett, A.G., Wren, J.D. (2019)  Examination of CIs in health and medical journals from 1976 to 2019: an observational study. 

(Australia) Skin cancer doctor in hot water after papers retracted – The Age (Liam Mannix and Tom Cowie | November 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on November 24, 2019
 

For most, sailing the Mediterranean on a luxury cruise ship is a relaxing escape. But skin cancer expert Professor Anthony Dixon was working. And a storm was about to hit the credibility of his research.

Over the 12-day cruise, the professor spent nine hours teaching doctors and nurses how to recognise skin cancer. A prominent educator, Professor Dixon has trained dozens of health professionals in his methods, many of them on cruise ships.

But two of his journal articles were about to be retracted after complaints from other cancer experts that they contained factual errors. Such retractions are considered rare and necessary to prevent inaccurate information being available to other practitioners.

Read the rest of this news story

0