a Bander Center for Medical Business Ethics, Saint Louis University , St. Louis , Missouri , USA.
Account Res. 2013;20(5-6):320-38. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2013.822248.
We analyzed 40 cases of falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism (FFP), comparing them to other types of wrongdoing in research (n=40) and medicine (n=40). Fifty-one variables were coded from an average of 29 news or investigative reports per case. Financial incentives, oversight failures, and seniority correlate significantly with more serious instances of FFP. However, most environmental variables were nearly absent from cases of FFP and none were more strongly present in cases of FFP than in other types of wrongdoing. Qualitative data suggest FFP involves thinking errors, poor coping with research pressures, and inadequate oversight. We offer recommendations for education, institutional investigations, policy, and further research.
我们分析了 40 例伪造、编造或抄袭（FFP）案例，并将其与其他类型的研究（n=40）和医学（n=40）不当行为进行了比较。对每个案例的平均 29 份新闻或调查报告中的 51 个变量进行了编码。财务激励、监督失败和资历与更严重的 FFP 显著相关。然而，大多数环境变量在 FFP 案例中几乎不存在，没有任何一个变量比其他类型的不当行为更强烈地存在于 FFP 案例中。定性数据表明，FFP 涉及思维错误、对研究压力的应对能力差和监督不足。我们为教育、机构调查、政策和进一步研究提供了建议。
