Research Process and Research Integrity

2017 ◽  
pp. 12-12
Author(s):  
Rajendra Karkee
Keyword(s):  
Research Integrity ◽  
Research Process

scholarly journals Research Integrity and Hidden Value Conflicts

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gert Helgesson ◽  
William Bülow
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Process Data ◽  
Value Conflicts ◽  
Central Values ◽  
Open Discussion ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Quality Of Research

AbstractResearch integrity is a well-established term used to talk and write about ethical issues in research. Part of its success might be its broad applicability. In this paper, we suggest that this might also be its Achilles heel, since it has the potential to conceal important value conflicts. We identify three broad domains upon which research integrity is applied in the literature: (1) the researcher (or research group), (2) research, and (3) research-related institutions and systems. Integrity in relation to researchers concerns character, although it remains to specify precisely what character traits are the desirable ones in this context and what values researchers should endorse. Integrity in relation to research concerns correct and sufficient description of the research process, data, results, and overall ‘research record’. Hence, it concerns the quality of research. However, whether or not this notion of research integrity covers all ethical aspects of research depends on whether one endorses a wider or a narrower interpretation of the ‘research process’. Integrity in relation to research-related institutions and systems leaves open whether they should be understood as agents in their own right or merely as means to research integrity. Besides the potential lack of clarity that our analysis reveals, we point to how this variety in uses might lead to concealment of value conflicts and propose an open discussion of central values.

scholarly journals Research integrity and misconduct: a clarification of the concepts

Curationis ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
TD Khanyile ◽  
S Duma ◽  
LP Fakude ◽  
N Mbombo ◽  
F Daniels ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Research Misconduct ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Concept Analysis ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Developmental Perspective ◽  
Legal Perspective ◽  
Scientific Ethics ◽  
Scientific Environment

The commercialization of research and the ever changing scientific environment has led scholars to shift the focus from promoting research integrity to regulating misconduct. As a result, most literature explains research integrity in terms of avoidance of misconduct. The purpose of the paper is to stimulate reflection and discussion on research integrity and research misconduct. This article explores the meaning of research integrity and research misconduct, and how research integrity can be promoted to ensure safer research and scholarship. We believe that the discussion can help clarify some hazy areas in the research and publication processes, and appreciate some crucial aspects that they may have seen taken for granted. The purpose of this article is to share with the readers some clarification or analysis of the two concepts namely: research integrity and misconduct. The objectives are: (1) To explore and analyse the concepts of research integrity and research misconduct from the educational or developmental perspective and not the legal perspective as others in literature have done. (2) To stimulate the reflection and discussion on strategies to promote research integrity and thus prevent research misconduct Literature review and concept analysis was undertaken to clarify the two concepts. We argue that the two concepts can be viewed along a continuum, i.e. where research integrity ends, research misconduct starts. We also argue that it is the responsibility of the research community at large to always ensure that the scientific ethics balance is maintained throughout the research process to ensure research integrity and avoid research misconduct. We also argue that research integrity is interlinked with morality while misconduct is interlinked with immorality.

scholarly journals Important Topics for Fostering Research Integrity by Research Performing and Research Funding Organizations: A Delphi Consensus Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishma Labib ◽  
Rea Roje ◽  
Lex Bouter ◽  
Guy Widdershoven ◽  
Natalie Evans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Responsible Research ◽  
Preventative Approach

AbstractTo foster research integrity (RI), it is necessary to address the institutional and system-of-science factors that influence researchers’ behavior. Consequently, research performing and research funding organizations (RPOs and RFOs) could develop comprehensive RI policies outlining the concrete steps they will take to foster RI. So far, there is no consensus on which topics are important to address in RI policies. Therefore, we conducted a three round Delphi survey study to explore which RI topics to address in institutional RI policies by seeking consensus from research policy experts and institutional leaders. A total of 68 RPO and 52 RFO experts, representing different disciplines, countries and genders, completed one, two or all rounds of the study. There was consensus among the experts on the importance of 12 RI topics for RPOs and 11 for RFOs. The topics that ranked highest for RPOs concerned education and training, supervision and mentoring, dealing with RI breaches, and supporting a responsible research process (e.g. through quality assurance). The highest ranked RFO topics concerned dealing with breaches of RI, conflicts of interest, and setting expectations on RPOs (e.g. about educating researchers about RI). Together with the research policy experts and institutional leaders, we developed a comprehensive overview of topics important for inclusion in the RI policies of RPOs and RFOs. The topics reflect preference for a preventative approach to RI, coupled with procedures for dealing with RI breaches. RPOs and RFOs should address each of these topics in order to support researchers in conducting responsible research.

scholarly journals Dealing with Un(Expected) Ethical Dilemma: Experience from the Field

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zaleha Othman ◽  
Fathilatul Zakimi Abdul Hamid
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Ethical Dilemma ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Ethical Dilemmas ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Data Interpretation ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Sensitive Topics ◽  
Record Data

Despite the growing interest in qualitative research and discussion of ethics, there has been little focus in the literature on the specific ethical dilemmas faced by researchers. In this paper, we share our fieldwork experiences regarding the ethical dilemmas that we encountered while doing research on a sensitive topic. Specifically, we share some of the ethical dilemmas, that is, concerning confidentiality, anonymity, legitimacy, controversial data, interpretation and off-the-record data, which emerged from the research. Most importantly, this paper shares ideas concerning how researchers might deal with ethical issues while preserving their integrity in the research process. Overall, this paper suggests approaches that qualitative researchers can adopt when doing research on sensitive topics. The paper contributes towards closing an existing gap in the literature, making visible the challenges frequently faced by qualitative researchers, that is, the vulnerability of researchers while preserving research integrity. Finally, this paper concludes with the suggestion that ethical dilemmas are part of the research process in doing qualitative research. However, it is suggested that future research should focus on ethical issues from the perspective of the researchers as well as the respondents.

Integrity in Research

2018 ◽  
pp. 397-416
Author(s):  
Sandra Carvalho ◽  
Gustavo Rivara ◽  
Andre Brunoni ◽  
Felipe Fregni
Keyword(s):  
Human Subjects ◽  
Research Misconduct ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Research Process ◽  
International Committee ◽  
Ethical Principles ◽  
Belmont Report ◽  
Subject Selection ◽  
Scientific Report ◽  
Ethics In Research

This chapter discusses authorship, ethics in research, plagiarism, and misconduct. It summarizes the general criteria for scientific report authorship according to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and Ethics in Research. It discusses ethics in research, based on the famous Tuskegee syphilis study, and the Belmont Report that followed it. Three basic ethical principles derived from the Belmont Report—respect for persons, beneficence, and justice—and their impact on research with human subjects are discussed, along with the direct applications of these three ethical principles: informed consent, risk/benefit ratio, and subject selection. Finally, the chapter reviews the main aspects of research misconduct and presents some examples. Research integrity requires that the research process is governed by honesty, objectivity, and verifiable methods, instead of preconceived ideas and expectations. It is an important topic to be reviewed and discussed before anyone decides to pursue the field of clinical research.

scholarly journals Important topics for fostering research integrity by research performing and research funding organizations – A Delphi consensus study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishma Labib ◽  
Rea Scepanovic ◽  
Lex Bouter ◽  
Guy Widdershoven ◽  
Natalie Evans ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Delphi Study ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Delphi Consensus ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Delphi Studies ◽  
Preventative Approach

Background: To foster research integrity (RI), it is necessary to address the institutional and system-of-science factors that influence researchers’ behavior. Consequently, research performing and research funding organizations (RPOs and RFOs) should develop RI promotion plans (RIPPs) outlining the concrete steps they will take to foster RI. So far, there is no consensus on which topics are important to address in RIPPs. This study aimed to explore which RI topics to address in RIPPs by seeking consensus from research policy experts and institutional leaders. Additionally, we aimed to rank the identified RI topics in priority. Methods: We employed a three round Delphi study to reach our objectives. Delphi studies include a series (‘rounds’) of questionnaires. To achieve consensus, results are fed back to respondents between subsequent rounds. In Round 1, we asked research policy experts to rate the importance of RI topics on a 1-5 scale. In Round 2, they were asked to rank the topics, which received consensus on importance, in order of priority to be included in RIPPs. In Round 3, experts were asked to provide answers to open-ended questions about the rationale behind the rankings in the previous round.Results: A total of 68 RPO and 52 RFO experts, representing different disciplines, countries and genders, completed one, two or all rounds of the Delphi study. There was consensus among the experts on the importance of 12 RI topics for RPOs and 11 for RFOs (67% agreement on ratings 4-5). The topics that ranked highest for RPOs concerned education and training, supervision and mentoring, supporting a responsible research process (e.g. through quality assurance), and dealing with RI breaches. The highest ranked RFO topics concerned dealing with breaches of RI, conflicts of interest and setting expectations on RPOs (e.g. about educating researchers about RI).Conclusions: Together with research policy experts and institutional leaders, we developed a comprehensive overview of topics important for inclusion in RIPPs of RPOs and RFOs. The topics reflect a clear preference for a preventative approach to RI, coupled with fair procedures for dealing with RI breaches. Study pre-registration: https://osf.io/saj4u

scholarly journals Ethical considerations in the biomedical research: analysis of national biomedical research ethics guidelines in Iran

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amirhossein Mardani ◽  
Maryam Nakhoda ◽  
Alireza Noruzi ◽  
Ehsan Shamsi Gooshki
Keyword(s):  
Research Ethics ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Regulatory Body ◽  
National Guidelines ◽  
Ethical Considerations ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
Operation Stage ◽  
Research Operation

The national guidelines for biomedical research ethics are approved by the “National Committee for Ethics in Biomedical Research” at the Iranian Ministry of Health and Medical Education as the regulatory body for biomedical research in the country. The focus of these guidelines should be on the ethical issues related to different stages of the research process, which would lead to increased research integrity and better supervision of research activities. The present study analyzed the contents of these national guidelines to clarify the ethical considerations connected to the five stages of a research process including 1) proposing, 2) approval, 3) operation, 4) documentation and 5) publishing. The findings showed that the assessed guidelines laid more emphasis on the ethical considerations related to the research operation stage rather than the proposal stage. In other words, activities such as identification of the research problem, formulation of hypotheses and questions, financial evaluation, data analysis and data interpretation did not receive adequate attention in these guidelines. Most of the guidelines presented subject categories such as the rights of participants and supervisory considerations in the “research operation stage”, ethical considerations in the “evaluation and approval procedure stage”, and editorial responsibilities in the “research review and publication stage”. In general, despite noticeable content for guiding researchers for ethical conduction of research the national guidelines are not adequately developed to cover comprehensive and sufficient ethical considerations regarding all the activities of research.

Data Quality Assurance Begins Before Data Collection and Never Ends: What Marketing Researchers Absolutely Need to Remember

2021 ◽  
pp. 147078532110521
Author(s):  
Zachary Moore ◽  
Dana E. Harrison ◽  
Joe Hair
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Data Quality ◽  
Marketing Research ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Data Types ◽  
High Quality Research ◽  
Current State ◽  
Marketing Data ◽  
Collection Practices

Data quality has become an area of increasing concern in marketing research. Methods of collecting data, types of data analyzed, and data analytics techniques have changed substantially in recent years. It is important, therefore, to examine the current state of marketing research, and particularly self-administered questionnaires. This paper provides researchers important advice and rules of thumb for crafting high quality research in light of the contemporary changes occuring in modern marketing data collection practices. This is accomplished by a proposed six-step research design process that ensures data quality, and ultimately research integrity, are established and maintained throughout the research process—from the earliest conceptualization and design phases, through data collection, and ultimately the reporting of results. This paper provides a framework, which if followed, will result in reduced headaches for researchers and more robust results for decision makers.

Projecting a European Diploma in Psychology

2002 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 221-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernhard Wilpert
Keyword(s):  
Research Process ◽  
Project Team ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Research Results ◽  
External Constraints ◽  
Internal Procedures ◽  
The Eu

The paper presents an inside evaluation of the EuroPsyT project, funded by the EU Leonardo Program in 1999-2001. While standard research usually neglects to reflect on the internal and external constraints and opportunities under which research results are achieved, the paper stresses exactly those aspects: starting from a brief description of the overall objectives of the 11 countries project, the paper proceeds to describe the macro-context and the internal strengths and weaknesses of the project team, the internal procedures of cooperation,. and obstacles encountered during the research process. It winds up in noting some of the project's achievements and with a look towards future research.

Responsible science: Ensuring the integrity of the research process.

1996 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-83
Author(s):  
Terri Gullickson ◽  
Pamela Ramser
Keyword(s):  
Research Process
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document