scholarly journals Making researchers responsible: Attributions of responsibility and ambiguous notions of culture in research codes of conduct

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Govert Valkenburg ◽  
Guus Dix ◽  
Joeri Tijdink ◽  
Sarah de Rijcke
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Close Reading ◽  
Attribution Of Responsibility ◽  
Attributions Of Responsibility ◽  
Institutional Level ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Exact Boundary ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Responsible Research

Abstract Background: Research codes of conduct offer guidance to researchers with respect to which values should be realized in research practices, how these values are to be realized, and what the respective responsibilities of the individual and the institution are in this. However, the question of how the responsibilities are to be divided between the individual and the institution has hitherto received little attention. We therefore performed an analysis of research codes of conduct to investigate how responsibilities are positioned as individual or institutional, and how the boundary between the two is drawn. Method: We selected 12 institutional, national and international codes of conduct that apply to medical research in the Netherlands and subjected them to a close-reading content analysis. We first identified the dominant themes and then investigated how responsibility is attributed to individuals and institutions.Results: We observed that the attribution of responsibility to either the individual or the institution is often not entirely clear, and that the notion of culture emerges as a residual category for such attributions. We see this notion of responsible research cultures as important; it is something that mediates between the individual level and the institutional level. However, at the same time it largely lacks substantiation. Conclusions: While many attributions of individual and institutional responsibility are clear, the exact boundary between the two is often problematic. We suggest two possible avenues for improving codes of conduct: either to clearly attribute responsibilities to individuals or institutions and depend less on the notion of culture, or to make culture a more explicit concern and articulate what it is and how a good culture might be fostered.

scholarly journals Making researchers responsible: Attributions of responsibility and ambiguous notions of culture in research codes of conduct

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Govert Valkenburg ◽  
Guus Dix ◽  
Joeri Tijdink ◽  
Sarah de Rijcke
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Close Reading ◽  
Attributions Of Responsibility ◽  
Institutional Level ◽  
Exact Boundary ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Responsible Research ◽  
Institutional Responsibility

Abstract Background Research codes of conduct offer guidance to researchers with respect to which values should be realized in research practices, how these values are to be realized, and what the respective responsibilities of the individual and the institution are in this. However, the question how the division between individual and institutional responsibilities is to be made, has hitherto received little attention. Therefore, we conduct an analysis of research codes of conduct, and investigate how responsibilities are positioned as individual or institutional ones and how the boundary between those two is shaped.Method We selected 12 codes of conduct that apply to medical research in the Netherlands, and performed a close-reading content analysis of these codes of conduct. We first identify dominant themes, and then investigate how responsibility is attributed to individuals and institutions.Results We observe that in many cases, the attribution of the responsibility to either the individual or the institution is not entirely clear and that the notion of culture appears as a residual category for such attributions. This notion of responsible research cultures is deemed important as something that mediates between the individual and institutional level, but at the same time largely lacks substantiation.Conclusions While many attributions of individual and institutional responsibility are clear, the exact boundary between individual and institutional responsibility is often problematic. We suggest two possible avenues for improvement in codes of conduct: either clearly attribute responsibilities to individuals or institutions and depend less less on the notion of culture, or make culture a more explicit concern and articulate what it is and how it could be fostered.

scholarly journals Making researchers responsible: Attributions of responsibility and ambiguous notions of culture in research codes of conduct

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Govert Valkenburg ◽  
Guus Dix ◽  
Joeri Tijdink ◽  
Sarah de Rijcke
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Close Reading ◽  
Attributions Of Responsibility ◽  
Institutional Level ◽  
Exact Boundary ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Responsible Research ◽  
Institutional Responsibility

Abstract Background: Research codes of conduct offer guidance to researchers with respect to which values should be realized in research practices, how these values are to be realized, and what the respective responsibilities of the individual and the institution are in this. However, the question how the division between individual and institutional responsibilities is to be made, has hitherto received little attention. Therefore, we conduct an analysis of research codes of conduct, and investigate how responsibilities are positioned as individual or institutional ones and how the boundary between those two is shaped. Method: We selected 12 institutional, national and international codes of conduct that apply to medical research in the Netherlands, and performed a close-reading content analysis of these codes of conduct. We first identify dominant themes, and then investigate how responsibility is attributed to individuals and institutions. Results: We observe that in many cases, the attribution of the responsibility to either the individual or the institution is not entirely clear and that the notion of culture appears as a residual category for such attributions. This notion of responsible research cultures is deemed important as something that mediates between the individual and institutional level, but at the same time largely lacks substantiation. Conclusions: While many attributions of individual and institutional responsibility are clear, the exact boundary between individual and institutional responsibility is often problematic. We suggest two possible avenues for improvement in codes of conduct: either clearly attribute responsibilities to individuals or institutions and depend less less on the notion of culture, or make culture a more explicit concern and articulate what it is and how it could be fostered.

Rocks in the Stream: An Exploration of Knowledge Flow Inhibitors and Modulators within Organizations

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Kasten
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Knowledge Flow ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Individual

This study analyzes the flow of knowledge within firms at the individual level. Managers participate in semi-structured interviews. Content analysis identifies factors that obstruct or modulate the flow of knowledge such as knowledge filtering and packaging. These must be understood in order to create more effective knowledge flow within organizations.Cette étude analyse la circulation des connaissances dans les organisations au niveau individuel. Les gestionnaires participent à des entrevues semi-structurées. Une analyse du contenu identifie les facteurs qui entravent ou modulent la circulation des connaissances, comme le filtrage et l’intégration des connaissances. Ces facteurs doivent être compris de manière à créer une circulation des connaissances plus efficace dans les organisations. 

scholarly journals Is it my responsibility or theirs? Risk communication about antibiotic resistance in the Swedish daily press

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (03) ◽  
pp. A02 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustav Bohlin ◽  
Gunnar E. Höst
Keyword(s):  
Antibiotic Resistance ◽  
Content Analysis ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Daily Press ◽  
Efficacy Measures ◽  
Societal Level ◽  
Risk Reduction Measures ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Global Threat

Antibiotic resistance is an increasing global threat involving many actors, including the general public. We present findings from a content analysis of the coverage of antibiotic resistance in the Swedish print media with respect to the risk communication factors cause, magnitude and countermeasures. The most commonly reported cause of development and spread of resistance was unnecessary prescription of antibiotics. Risk magnitudes were mostly reported qualitatively rather than using quantitative figures. Risk-reduction measures were analyzed using a framework that distinguishes between personal and societal efficacy. Measures at the societal level were more commonly reported compared to the individual level.

scholarly journals The Opportunities of the Performance-based Publication Model in Hungary

2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-133
Author(s):  
Péter Sasvári ◽  
Bálint Teleki ◽  
Anna Urbanovics
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Citation Index ◽  
Multiple Authorship ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Institutional Level ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
Index Level ◽  
The Individual

The performance-based publication model is a direct rewarding system among the scientific community, referring to the reward that authors receive for their publications. The amount of the reward depends on the citation index level of the journal in which a given article is published. Based on international best practices, the paper aims to investigate the possibilities of the implementation of this publication model within the Hungarian context. The model’s main advantage is that rewarding takes place at the individual level so its distribution is independent from the institutional level. After reviewing the best practices used in various countries worldwide, an empirical analysis is carried out which is based on the total number of publications in Hungary in 2019 indexed by Scopus. It means a total of 12,281 publications, based on scientometric indicators. Two models are used, model A considers the Hungarian co-authorship rate of the publications while model B takes the amount of the reward into account based on the publication without the co-authorship rate. Results show that in Hungary, the disciplines of Medicine and Engineering are the most competitive at an international level where we find a high proportion of highly indexed Q1 and Q2 publications. Beside these, results demonstrate the dominance of multiple authorship and journal articles in the research sample. As a conclusion, the proposed publication model could be implemented within the Hungarian context, based on the analysis, its estimated cost would be around 6 billion Hungarian forints.

Temporary Appointments and Judicial Independence: Theoretical Analysis and Empirical Findings from the Supreme Court of Israel

2001 ◽  
Vol 35 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 481-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eli M. Salzberger
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Judicial Independence ◽  
Institutional Level ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Essential Condition ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Individual

Judicial independence is regarded as an essential condition for the rule of law and separation of powers — two pillars of liberal democracy. Judicial independence ought to include components to secure independence on the individual level, as well as components to secure independence on the institutional level of courts. The most important objects of judicial independence are the other branches of government, but some degree of independence from the general public and from other judges is required as well. These features of independence can be achieved by rigid and entrenched arrangements regarding tenure, immunity from wage decrease, special procedures for appointment and promotion of judges, mechanisms for the allocation of cases to judges and the composition of the benches, and more.

scholarly journals Inequalities and Asymmetries

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamara Kneese ◽  
Alex Rosenblat ◽  
danah boyd
Keyword(s):  
Social Services ◽  
Data Access ◽  
Institutional Level ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Political Determinants ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Technical Capacity ◽  
Analyze Data

The availability of data is not evenly distributed. Some organizations, agencies, and sectors are better equipped to gather, use, and analyze data than others. If data is transformative, what are the consequences of defense and security agencies having greater capacity to leverage data than, say, education or social services? Financial wherewithal, technical capacity, and political determinants all affect where data is employed. As data and analytics emerge, who benefits and who doesn't, both at the individual level and the institutional level? What about the asymmetries between those who provide the data and those who collect it? How does uneven data access affect broader issues of inequality? In what ways does data magnify or combat asymmetries inpower?

scholarly journals DOES THE SOCIAL NETWORK RELATE WITH THE ENTREPRENEURSHIP? AN EMPIRICAL CONTENT ANALYSIS

2017 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 205
Author(s):  
Arissetyanto Nugroho ◽  
Janfry Sihite
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Social Network ◽  
Multidimensional Scaling ◽  
Keyword Search ◽  
Continuous Process ◽  
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor ◽  
Firm Level ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Global Entrepreneurship ◽  
The Individual

The aim of the content analysis is to construct social network terminology in entrepreneurship journal. There are 97 journal abstracts that analyzed from six keyword search query in Proquest, the queries are “Entrepreneur & Behavior”, “Entrepreneurship & Creativity & Innovation”, “Entrepreneurship & Social Network”, “Entrepreneurship & Culture”, “Entrepreneurship & Marketing” and “Global Entrepreneurship Monitor”. All the abstracts analyzed with Provalis Research QDA Miner, a Qualitative Quantitative Data Analysis software. QDA miner identified relevant keyword, relate keywords with jaggard coefficient of cooccurrence and the proximity plot. All the relevant keywords being analyzed with Multidimensional Scaling (MDS) and construct the relevant keywords regards to social network. Finally, there are two main findings, the first finding distinquishes the three level of analysis framework which are the individual level, the firm level and the macro level as representation of the continuous process to accumulate  resources. The second finding construct social network as national culture, furthermore the construct of social network closely related with social capital and human capital. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk membangun konstruksi terminologi jejaring sosial berdasarkan jurnal kewirausahaan. Abstrak jurnal yang akan dianalisa diperoleh dengan kata kunci pencarian “Entrepreneur & Behavior”, “Entrepreneurship & Creativity & Innovation”, “Entrepreneurship & Social Network”, “Entrepreneurship & Culture”, “Entrepreneurship & Marketing” dan “Global Entrepreneurship Monitor”, total diperoleh 97 abstrak jurnal yang kemudian dianalisa dengan software analisa kualitatif kuantitatif Provalis Research. Kata kunci yang relevan diidentifikasi, selanjutnya coocurence dan proximity plot kata kunci dianalisa dengan koefisien jaccard. Didalam tahapan akhir semua kata kunci selanjutnya dianalisa dengan Multidimensional Scaling (MDS). MDS membangun konstruksi kata kunci yang berhubungan dengan jejaring sosial. 2 temuan utama didalam penelitian ini adalah: pertama, penelitian ini mendukung kerangka kerja analisa 3 tingkat kewirausahaan yaitu tingkat individual, perusahaan, dan makro sebagai kerangka kerja yang mencerminkan proses berkesinambungan kewirausahaan dalam akumulasi sumber daya. Temuan kedua membangun konstruksi bahwa jejaring sosial berkaitan erat dengan budaya nasional, modal sosial dan modal sumber daya manusia. 

Journalistic Autonomy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henrik Örnebring ◽  
Michael Karlsson
Keyword(s):  
Political Influence ◽  
Information Provision ◽  
The State ◽  
Organizational Level ◽  
The Political ◽  
Undue Influence ◽  
Institutional Level ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Political Interference ◽  
The Individual

The notion of journalistic autonomy is the idea that journalism as a societal institution, as well as individual journalists in their workplace (the newsroom), should be free from undue influence from other societal institutions and actors. The term “independence” is frequently used as synonymous with autonomy. Journalistic autonomy is commonly seen as normatively desirable as it is linked to two of journalism’s core democratic functions: information provision (journalists who are not autonomous may produce biased information) and the watchdog function (non-autonomous journalists may act in the interests of other actors when fulfilling the watchdog function rather than in the public interest). Autonomy exists on three distinct analytical levels: first, the institutional level (referring to journalism as a whole, being independent from other societal institutions like the state and the market); second, the individual level (referring to individual journalists having discretionary decision-making power in their own work); and third, the organizational level (referring to the workplace level, where individual preferences frequently are mediated by institutional constrains). In general, journalism research has focused mostly on analyzing autonomy on the institutional and individual levels and less on the organizational level. Research on journalistic autonomy on the institutional level focuses on the autonomy of journalism from the state (or, more broadly, the political sphere in general) and the market. The key instrument for both state and market actors seeking to influence journalism (thereby decreasing journalistic autonomy) is information subsidies, that is, information resources of different types that conform to journalistic genre demands and professional norms but which also advance the agenda of the actors who produce them. Research on journalistic autonomy on the individual level focuses on so-called perceived influences on journalistic work, that is, the factors that journalists themselves see as limiting their autonomy. There are broad cross-national patterns to such perceptions. The political system is the most important determinant of perceived political influence, as journalists in more authoritarian countries perceive more political interference than journalists in democratic countries. Another broad pattern is that nation-level and individual-level influences are perceived as more important than organizational-level influences. Almost regardless of country, most journalists actually see themselves as having a high degree of workplace autonomy. This is in contrast to the research on organizational-level autonomy (as well as much of the research on autonomy on the institutional level), which demonstrates that journalists’ workplace autonomy is constrained in many important ways. Tacit rules, implicit policies, and norms of professionalism all combine to make journalists obedient employees who generally voluntarily accept many constraints on their autonomy without perceiving them as such. Only overt and explicit attempts from political and commercial actors to control reporting are perceived as interference, whereas informal norms of story selection that favor resource-rich actors are seen as “natural” or “normal.” Thus in many ways, journalistic autonomy is a rhetorical construct as much as a normative ideal.

Invention commercialization among Russian scientists: bridging the gap between ideational and material realms

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Turkhan Sadigov
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Management Practice ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Directed Content Analysis ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Population Attitudes ◽  
Depth Interviews

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is twofold. First, the article explores an understudied side of invention commercialization–the rejection of business as something “dirty” among Russian scientists. As such, the paper contributes to the individual-level explanations of innovation promotion, hence balancing extant literature's excessive focus on institutional explanations. Second, the article suggests that Russian scientists' rejection of business is rooted in broader Russian work ethics rift between “material” and “ideational” aspects of life. As such, the paper shows how dominant collective values refract in the management practice of specific social class, i.e. of scientists.Design/methodology/approachTo analyze the rift between material and ideational aspects of Russian scientists' work, the article employs directed content analysis (DCA) of in-depth interviews with 45 Russian scholars. To address credibility bias of the research findings stemming from DCA, I further draw on the survey of existing studies, researches and polls highlighting Russian population attitudes toward the dichotomy between “material” and “ideal” realms.FindingsThis study argues that Russian scientists' likelihood of invention commercialization is positively associated with their ability to integrate in a personal psyche business and science as equally valuable facets of life.Originality/valueThe article identifies the three groups of scientists – opportunity-seekers, idealists and integrators – with different attitudes to invention commercialization. The article shows how policymakers should apply institutional incentives differently to each group of scientists to achieve higher rates of invention commercialization.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document