scholarly journals Path2Integrity Learning Cards: First Year Experiences of an Educational Programme to Foster Research Integrity

Edukacja ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-66
Author(s):  
Julia Priess-Buchheit ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Research Integrity ◽  
Role Playing ◽  
Educational Programme ◽  
First Year ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Citizen Education ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Research Education ◽  
Dialogical Approach ◽  
Responsible Research

This article outlines the experience gained in the first twelve (12) months of the Path2Integrity (P2I) learning programme, an initiative designed to promote reliable research results and responsible research practices with all students, not only those destined to be researchers. Path2Integrity learning cards are student-centred instructions with a dialogical approach, using role-playing and storytelling aimed at fostering a culture of research integrity. This report shows that feedback gathered in this first year of the P2I programme supported the following three actions. First, the feedback informed distinctions between the different contexts of research education and citizen education. Second, a handbook was prepared to accompany the learning cards. And finally, students will be asked in the future to reflect on the competencies each learning card features. A review of the feedback and actions will be followed by an overview of the implications for the programme itself and for research integrity education in general.

scholarly journals Superb Supervision: A pilot study on training supervisors to convey responsible research practices onto their PhD students

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamarinde Laura Haven ◽  
Lex Bouter ◽  
Louise Mennen ◽  
Joeri K. Tijdink
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Interpersonal Skills ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Training Programme ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Pilot Training ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Research Supervision ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Responsible Research

Background: One way to strengthen research integrity, is through supervision. According to previous research, a supervisor should be well versed in responsible research practices (RRPs) and possess the necessary interpersonal skills to convey RRPs. Therefore, we developed a pilot training programme for PhD supervisors that combined RRPs and interpersonal skills and evaluated participants’ perceptions. Our aim was to assess: 1) perceptions regarding supervision skills before and after the pilot training and 2) participants’ views on combining RRPs and interpersonal skills in the program.Methods: We developed a 3-day pilot training based on our investigations regarding the research climate for integrity in Amsterdam. Before and after the pilot, we sent the Research Supervision Quality Evaluation survey to the participating PhD supervisors and their PhD candidates. We gathered feedback on the training topics through daily evaluations. The pilot study was concluded with a focus group interview where participants discussed the quality of the training, deliberated over the combination of training in interpersonal skills and RRPs and discussed whether such training should become compulsory.Results: Twenty-one PhD supervisors participated in the pilot training of whom 95% had a biomedical background. Before the pilot, 20 supervisors and 23 PhD candidates completed the survey. 11 supervisors and 11 PhD candidates completed the final survey. Both supervisors and PhD candidates were more positive about the supervisor’s interpersonal skills and the ability to foster RRPs after the training. Participants were enthusiastic about the training’s dual focus. They believed that making the training compulsory would be undesirable but supported other ways of incentivising participation.Discussion: Participants appreciated the combination of RRPs and interpersonal skills. Their self-perceptions regarding supervision skills echo this positive view. The results highlight the potential of dedicated RRPs training programmes for supervisors. However, they should be interpreted with caution, as they regard a small sample of volunteering PhD supervisors, underscoring the need for larger scale programs to foster responsible supervision that are evaluated using rigorous designs.

scholarly journals Explaining variance in perceived research misbehavior - Results from a survey among academic researchers in Amsterdam

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamarinde Laura Haven ◽  
Joeri K. Tijdink ◽  
Brian C Martinson ◽  
Lex Bouter ◽  
Frans J. Oort
Keyword(s):  
Research Question ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Climate Factors ◽  
Measurement Instruments ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Academic Researchers ◽  
Research Climate ◽  
Academic Organization ◽  
Responsible Research

Breaches of research integrity have sparked interest in the factors that may help explain when research misbehavior is more likely to occur. Often three clusters of factors are distinguished: individual factors, climate factors and publication factors. Our research question is: to what extent can individual, climate and publication factors explain the variance in frequently perceived research misbehaviors? We used validated measurement instruments for these three clusters of factors to survey academic researchers in Amsterdam. Results showed that individual, climate and publication factors combined explain 32% of variance in perceived frequency of research misbehavior. The cluster accounting for the greatest percentage of explained variance was the research climate (23%). The research climate factors included in our study concern perceptions of specific dimensions of the academic organization, such as the existence of research-related norms and socialization activities into responsible research practices within a department, and the quality of resources an institute has available to support researchers in their work. Our results underscore the important role of the research climate in fostering responsible research practices and suggest that the frequency of research misbehaviors might be lowered by putting more emphasis on the socialization into ethical departmental norms and creating an open departmental atmosphere.

scholarly journals Prevalence of responsible research practices and their potential explanatory factors: a survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gowri Gopalakrishna ◽  
Jelte M. Wicherts ◽  
Gerko Vink ◽  
Ineke Stoop ◽  
Olmo Van den Akker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Academic Rank ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Arts And Humanities ◽  
Explanatory Factors ◽  
Scientific Norm ◽  
Publication Pressure ◽  
Funding Pressure ◽  
Responsible Research

BackgroundWhile substantial attention has been paid to research misbehaviors, responsible research practices (RRPs) and their potential explanatory factors have not been studied extensively.Methods The National Survey on Research Integrity (NSRI) is an online survey targeting all disciplines and academic ranks in The Netherlands. Data was collected on 11 RRPs and 12 explanatory factor scales. Results were controlled for explanatory factor scales, academic rank, disciplinary field, gender, doing empirical research and if respondents belonged to a NSRI supporting institution or not.Results6,813 respondents completed the survey. The RRPs with the highest prevalence were avoiding plagiarism (99%), disclosing conflicts of interest (96.5%) and checking for errors before publication (94.3%). Preregistration of study protocols (42.8%), making accessible underlying data and syntaxes (47.2%), and keeping comprehensive research records (56.3%) had the lowest prevalence. Arts and humanities scholars, PhD candidates and junior researchers were associated with a lower RRP mean (-0.51 and -0.31 respectively) as was publication pressure (-0.05; 95% CI -0.08, -0.02). Mentoring (0.15; 95% CI 0.12, 0.17), scientific norm subscription (0.13; 95% CI 0.1, 0.15) and funding pressure (0.13; 95% CI0.10, 0.17) were significantly associated with a higher RRP mean.ConclusionsWe found publication pressure to affect RRPs negatively. Mentoring, scientific norm subscription and funding pressure may help foster RRPs. Arts and humanities scholars, PhD candidates and junior researchers need more efforts to raise awareness on RRPs. Further research on these groups is warranted in order to understand research integrity challenges that may be unique to them.

Characterization of infrared materials EU 1269-Belgium: research results of the first year

1996 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piet Union ◽  
Peter F. Muys ◽  
Dirk Vyncke ◽  
Ben Depuydt ◽  
Pierre M. Boone
Keyword(s):  
First Year ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Infrared Materials

scholarly journals Rethinking success, integrity, and culture in research (Part 2) — A multi-actor qualitative study on problems of science

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noémie Aubert Bonn ◽  
Wim Pinxten
Keyword(s):  
Research Misconduct ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Research Issues ◽  
Questionable Research Practices ◽  
The Rich ◽  
Research Students ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACTBackgroundResearch misconduct and questionable research practices have been the subject of increasing attention in the past few years. But despite the rich body of research available, few empirical works provide the perspectives of non-researcher stakeholders.MethodsTo capture some of the forgotten voices, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with policy makers, funders, institution leaders, editors or publishers, research integrity office members, research integrity community members, laboratory technicians, researchers, research students, and former-researchers who changed career to inquire on the topics of success, integrity, and responsibilities in science. We used the Flemish biomedical landscape as a baseline to be able to grasp the views of interacting and complementary actors in a system setting.ResultsGiven the breadth of our results, we divided our findings in a two-paper series with the current paper focusing on the problems that affect the quality and integrity of science. We first discovered that perspectives on misconduct, including the core reasons for condemning misconduct, differed between individuals and actor groups. Beyond misconduct, interviewees also identified numerous problems which affect the integrity of research. Issues related to personalities and attitudes, lack of knowledge of good practices, and research climate were mentioned. Elements that were described as essential for success (in the associate paper) were often thought to accentuate the problems of research climates by disrupting research cultures and research environments. Even though everyone agreed that current research climates need to be addressed, no one felt responsible nor capable of initiating change. Instead, respondents revealed a circle of blame and mistrust between actor groups.ConclusionsOur findings resonate with recent debates, and extrapolate a few action points which might help advance the discussion. First, we must tackle how research is assessed. Second, approaches to promote better science should be revisited: not only should they directly address the impact of climates on research practices, but they should also redefine their objective to empower and support researchers rather than to capitalize on their compliance. Finally, inter-actor dialogues and shared decision making are crucial to building joint objectives for change.Trial registrationosf.io/33v3m

scholarly journals The influence of environment forming factors on the productivity of winter wheat

2021 ◽  
Vol 207 (04) ◽  
pp. 9-16
Author(s):  
Valeriy Burluckiy ◽  
Polina Semeshkina ◽  
Vladimir Mazurov
Keyword(s):  
Winter Wheat ◽  
Statistical Processing ◽  
Mineral Fertilizers ◽  
First Year ◽  
Wheat Grain ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Yield And Quality ◽  
Close Relationship

Abstract. The goal is to study the influence of the predecessor and fertilizers on the yield and quality of winter wheat grain. Methods. The studies were carried out in a long-term stationary field experiment on a gray forest medium loamy soil. Field experience, observations, accounting and generalization of research results were carried out in accordance with the methodological recommendations of B.A. Dospekhov. Statistical processing of the research results was performed using Microsoft Excel 2007 with a 95 % significance level of the results. Results. As a result of the studies, it was noted that the studied predecessors had an insignificant effect on the development of winter wheat plants in the initial phases of growth. The density of winter wheat plants during the germination period varied within the range of 314–323 psc/m2 without the use of fertilizers and 317–328 psc/m2 against the background of their application. Further growth and development of plants took place in close relationship with the studied factors. At the end of the growing season, the number of productive stems was higher on the plots, where the clover of the first year of use was used as a predecessor, both in the control (without fertilizers) and when applying mineral fertilizers. Accordingly, the yield of winter wheat grain was higher for this predecessor, averaging 35.7 c/ha for 2014–2019. Without fertilization, depending on the predecessor, 25.2–32.8 c/ha were obtained, against the background of fertilization – 34.2–39.6 c/ha of winter wheat grain. On average, over the years of research, winter wheat grain contained 10.7–14.0 % protein. Depending on the year, this indicator varied from 8.8 % to 16.8 %. At the same time, the lowest values for the protein content were obtained for the variants without the use of fertilizers. In general, the content of protein and gluten in winter wheat grain largely depended on the application of mineral fertilizers and to a small extent on the predecessor. The weight of 1000 grains, depending on these factors, changed insignificantly.

scholarly journals Digital Badge in the Responsible Conduct of Research

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aoife Coffey ◽  
◽  
Louise Burgoyne ◽  
Brendan Palmer
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Responsible Conduct Of Research ◽  
Central Research ◽  
Graduate Studies ◽  
Research Environment ◽  
Learning Platform ◽  
Responsible Conduct ◽  
Open Research ◽  
Responsible Research

University College Cork is committed to the highest standard of Research Integrity (RI). The recently published National Framework on the Transition to an Open Research Environment aims to move Ireland another step closer to an open research environment (National Open Research Forum, 2019). One of the central elements underpinning the framework is Research Integrity and Responsible Research practice. This is also reflective of the international emphasis on not only a more open research environment but on more transparent and robust research practices generally, with a particular focus on data management and availability (​ Wilkinson et al., 2016).​ In 2016 a Research Integrity Pilot was run in the UCC Skills Centre in collaboration with the Office of the Vice President for Research and Innovation (OVPRI) and interested academics from the UCC community. Working closely with the Dean of Graduate studies, this pilot resulted in the development of the module PG6015 An​ Introduction to Research Integrity, Ethics and Open Science for postgraduate students. The new module did not address the needs of staff however, who needed an offering that was more condensed, targeted yet flexible when required. Along this developmental journey, UCC consulted with some leading experts in the field of Research Integrity (RI) by hosting, Prof. Philip DeShong and Prof. Robert Dooling from the University of Maryland via a Fulbright Specialist Award. This award facilitated real insight and a fuller understanding of what RI means together with the need for discipline specific discussion and debate around the topic of Responsible Conduct in Research in its fullest sense. In 2018, access to the Epigeum online course in Research Integrity was enabled through the National Research Integrity Forum. This course provides a good basis for learning in the area of RI but it does not address a need for a blended learning approach around the topics of Responsible Conduct of Research. Through this process began the genesis of an idea which in 2019 resulted in the development of the UCC Digital Badge in the Responsible Conduct of Research. Micro-credentials are a new and innovative learning platform that rewards learner effort outside of traditional pathways, digital badges are an example of these. The Digital Badge in the Responsible Conduct of Research is a research led, team based initiative developed through a unique interdisciplinary collaboration between central research services at UCC. The collaborative process has resulted in an offering that gives an integrated and comprehensive view of three distinct but related areas, Research Integrity, Research Data Management & the Fair Principles and Reproducible Research. Developed by OVPRI, UCC Library and the Clinical Research Facility-Cork (CRF-C), each of the collaborators were already providing training and resources in there own niche but realised a more holistic approach would be greater than the sum of its parts. The purpose of the Digital Badge is to foster and embed best practice and the key elements of Responsible Research in the UCC research community. It offers researchers an opportunity to address significant gaps in their skills and prepares them for the changes in the research landscape occurring both nationally and internationally.

DIGITAL ENGINES AT WORK: PROMOTING RESEARCH SKILLS IN STUDENTS

2021 ◽  
pp. 196-206
Author(s):  
Olga Suleimanova ◽  
◽  
Marina Fomina ◽  
Albina Vodyanitskaya ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Content Analysis ◽  
Search Engine ◽  
Teaching Practices ◽  
Digital Natives ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Teaching And Research ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Linguistic Research ◽  
Traditional Approaches ◽  
Relevant Education

The paper focuses on the digital teaching and research practices which make an indispensable integral component of upscale education. The authors compare traditional approaches to education against the much demanded by the society, promising approaches which heavily rely on the digital engines. Most relevant –education-wise –features of centennials / millennials, also referred to as “digital natives”, are taken into account. The digital teaching practices and digital research practices that can be used in teaching are outlined; teaching and research potential of some digital engines is examined. Corpus-based experiment along with the analysis of search engine results, cultural-linguistic research through Google and Yandex searching, Tropes Zoom’s content analysis and some other methodological novelties that can be used in the classroom as well as facilitate and substantiate the research results are analysed.

ASSESSMENT OF UNIVERSAL COMPETENCIES OF STUDENTS

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 384-393
Author(s):  
Irina Medvedeva ◽  
Oxana Martynyuk ◽  
Svetlana Pan’kova ◽  
Irina Solovyova
Keyword(s):  
Self Esteem ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
First Year ◽  
Expert Evaluation ◽  
State University ◽  
First Year Students ◽  
Research Results ◽  
And Mathematics

Assessing the competencies of students is an important and challenging task. The article presents the experience of evaluating the universal competencies of students. We created individual and group exercises, criteria for evaluating the results of these exercises for assessing the universal competencies of students. In addition to expert evaluation, students were interviewed to identify their self-esteem. The created assessment tools were used for several years at the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics of the Pskov State University to assess the universal competencies of first year students (more than 200 students participated). Some research results are analyzed in the article.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document