Skip to content

ACN - 101321555 | ABN - 39101321555

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

AHRECS icon
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Menu
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Consultants
    • Services
  • Previous Projects
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Feeds
  • Contact Us
  • More
    • Request a Quote
    • Susbcribe to REM
    • Subscribe to VIP
Exclude terms...
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
AHRECS
Analysis
Animal ethics
Animal Ethics Committee
Animal handling
Animal housing
Animal Research Ethics
Animal Welfare
ANZCCART
Artificial Intelligence
Arts
Australia
Authorship
Belief
Beneficence
Big data
Big data
Biobank
Bioethics
Biomedical
Biospecimens
Breaches
Cartoon/Funny
Case studies
Clinical trial
Collaborative research
Conflicts of interest
Consent
Controversy/Scandal
Controversy/Scandal
Creative
Culture
Data management
Database
Dual-use
Essential Reading
Ethical review
Ethnography
Euthanasia
Evaluative practice/quality assurance
Even though i
First People
Fraud
Gender
Genetics
Get off Gary Play man of the dog
Good practice
Guidance
Honesty
HREC
Human research ethics
Humanities
Institutional responsibilities
International
Journal
Justice
Links
Media
Medical research
Merit and integrity
Methodology
Monitoring
New Zealand
News
Online research
Peer review
Performance
Primary materials
Principles
Privacy
Protection for participants
Psychology
Publication ethics
Questionable Publishers
Research ethics committees
Research integrity
Research Misconduct
Research results
Researcher responsibilities
Resources
Respect for persons
Sample paperwork
sd
se
Serious Adverse Event
Social Science
SoTL
Standards
Supervision
Training
Vulnerability
x
Young people
Exclude news

Sort by

Animal Ethics Biosafety Human Research Ethics Research Integrity

A phenomenographic study of scientists’ beliefs about the causes of scientists’ research misconduct (Papers:  Aidan C Cairns, et al | sSeptember 2021)

Posted by Dr Gary Allen in Research Integrity on November 26, 2021
Keywords: Breaches, Good practice, Institutional responsibilities, Research Misconduct, Research results, Training

The Linked Original Item was Posted On September, 1 2021

Photo of light bulbs with shining fibres in ETHICS, RESPECT, HONESTY and INTEGRITY shape isolated on black background

In our experience, addressing questionable research practices in an institution is most effective if it is approached as a research culture concern and with a good understanding of how to affect change in attitudes.  So much of professional development efforts are based upon the assumption researchers are unaware of the institutional, national and international standards.  And that they are ignorant of the risks.   But are our assumptions correct?  This Creative Commons paper takes a deep dive into the issues.  This is a useful read for staff responsible for the research integrity professional development strategies of institutions and for RIAs.

Abstract
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.

Keywords
RCR education, research misconduct, phenomenography, values in science, responsible conduct of research, ethics training

Cairns, A. C., Linville, C., Garcia, T., Bridges, B., Tanona, S., Herington, J., & Laverty, J. T. (2021). A phenomenographic study of scientists’ beliefs about the causes of scientists’ research misconduct. Research Ethics, 17(4), 501–521. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161211042658
Publisher (Creative Commons): https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/17470161211042658

A phenomenographic study of scientists’ beliefs about the causes of scientists’ research misconduct - Aidan C Cairns, Caleb Linville, Tyler Garcia, Bill Bridges, Scott Tanona, Jonathan Herington, James T Laverty, 2021
When scientists act unethically, their actions can cause harm to participants, undermine knowledge creation, and discredit the scientific community. Responsible...

Related Reading

(UK) Embedding research integrity at the core of our science – Cancer Research UK (Phil Prime | July 2021)

Effective Strategies for Research Integrity Training—a Meta-analysis (Papers: Johannes Katsarov, et al | August 2021)

(US) The lab management practices of “Research Exemplars” that foster research rigor and regulatory compliance: A qualitative study of successful principal investigators (Papers: Alison L. Antes, et al | April 2019)

(India) Can standardised courses in research ethics prevent publication misconduct? – The LSE Impact Blog (Santosh C. Hulagabali | June 2021)

Stakeholders’ perspectives on research integrity training practices: a qualitative study (Papers: Daniel Pizzolato & Kris Dierickx | May 2021)

Why human research ethics and research integrity aren’t fire blankets

(Malaysia) Young scientists in Malaysia have made integrity training fun and relevant – Nature (De-Ming Chau | November 2020)

(Australia) ‘Nurture trumps nature’ in PhD success – Times Higher Education (John Ross | August 2020)

What are questionable research practices as reported by ECRs in STEMM in Australia?

Developing Grad Students’ Scientific Literacy Skills – Inside Higher Ed (David A. Sanders | February 2020)

Academic research integrity: Exploring researchers’ perceptions of responsibilities and enablers (Papers: Twan Huybers, et al | March 2020)

A randomized trial of a lab-embedded discourse intervention to improve research ethics – PNAS ( Dena K. Plemmons, et al | January 2020)

Is research integrity training a waste of time? – Nature (Gemma Conroy | February 2020)

Data Management Expert Guide (Guidance: CESSDA | December 2017)

Advancing research integrity: a programme to embed good practice in Africa (Papers: Anke Rohwer, et al | 2019)

Management of Data and Information in Research (NHMRC An Australian Code (2018) good practice guide | June 2019)

African governments need to fund research ethics training – University World News (Paul Ndebele | April 2019)

Australian Code 2018: What institutions should do next

What is ‘Necessary Training’ In Health-Related Research Ethics? – EthoxBlog (Kristine Bærøe | June 2017)

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

Doing Global Science: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in the Global Research Enterprise – IAP (InterAcademy Partnership)

Redefine misconduct as distorted reporting – Nature: World View Column (Daniele Fanelli | 2013)

Intuitive Research Ethics Training for Novices

Creating a Community of Data Champions (Papers: Rosie Higman, et al | 2017)

Why research integrity isn’t just “somebody else’s problem” – LSTM Seminar Series (Webinar: Elizabeth Wager | October 2016)

Should researchers guilty of misconduct go to “rehab”? – Retraction Watch (Alison McCook June 2016)

Interventions to prevent misconduct and promote integrity in research and publication (Review) (Papers: Ana Marusic et al 2016)

We would all benefit from more research integrity research

Do interventions to reduce misconduct actually work? Maybe not, says new report – Retraction Watch (Alison McCook 2016)

Related Links

  • About the contributors
  • About the keywords
  • Suggest a resource
  • Report problem/broken link
  • Request a Take Down

Compiled here are links, downloads and other resources relating to research integrity and human research ethics. more…

Resources Menu

Four hands solving a jigsaw against the sun blazing out of a cloudy sky

Research Integrity

  • Codes, guidelines, policies and standards
  • Guidance and resource material
  • Papers
  • Books
  • Animal Ethics

Human Research Ethics

  • Codes, guidelines, policies and standards
  • Guidance and resource material
  • Papers
  • Books

Research Ethics Monthly Receive copies of the Research Ethics Monthly directly
by email. We will never spam you.

  • Enter the answer as a word
  • Hidden
    This field is hidden and only used for import to Mailchimp
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Company
  • Terms Of Use
  • Copyright
  • Privacy Policy
  • Site Map
  • Site Map

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Facebook-f Twitter Linkedin-in