• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

早期职业研究人员视角下的科研诚信实践

Research Integrity Practices from the Perspective of Early-Career Researchers.

作者信息

Krstić Snežana B

机构信息

, PAK 175323, 11253, Belgrade, Serbia.

出版信息

Sci Eng Ethics. 2015 Oct;21(5):1181-96. doi: 10.1007/s11948-014-9607-z. Epub 2014 Oct 26.

DOI:10.1007/s11948-014-9607-z
PMID:25344843
Abstract

Unavailability of published data and studies focused on young researchers in Europe and research integrity issues reveals that clear understanding and stance on this subject within European area is lacking. Our study provides information on attitudes and experiences of European researchers at early career stages (doctoral and postdoctoral level), based on a limited sample of respondents (n = 27). The study provides both quantitative and qualitative results for the examined issues. The data suggest that awareness and interest of the younger researchers surveyed in research integrity issues is high, however, it is often based on self-initiatives, with many of the respondents not having adequate training or any possibility to obtain it. Our attitude survey conducted within the European Council of Doctoral Candidates and Junior Researchers indicates that only 22 % of respondents had an opportunity to obtain relevant training (significantly less than in a study conducted in the U.S.), and that only one third believed that institutions and supervisors regularly paid attention to it. Further, we noted certain differences between disciplines. The study also reveals that many younger researchers felt they faced problems due to the misconduct of their senior colleagues and the existing institutional culture. The results of the study indicate a need for better prevention mechanisms, training and raising awareness activities. Preferably, junior researchers should be given an active role in shaping the integrity culture. It should be noted that the presented results should be considered in the context of the limitations stemming from the small-scale survey. This paper encourages further research activities on research integrity practices to provide stronger evidence on the attitudes and experiences of young researchers in Europe and other parts of the world.

摘要

缺乏针对欧洲年轻研究人员的已发表数据和研究以及研究诚信问题,这表明欧洲地区在该主题上缺乏清晰的理解和立场。我们的研究基于有限的受访者样本(n = 27),提供了欧洲处于职业生涯早期阶段(博士和博士后水平)研究人员的态度和经历信息。该研究为所考察的问题提供了定量和定性结果。数据表明,参与调查的年轻研究人员对研究诚信问题的认识和兴趣很高,然而,这往往是基于自我主动行为,许多受访者没有接受过足够的培训,也没有机会获得相关培训。我们在欧洲博士生和初级研究人员理事会内部进行的态度调查显示,只有22%的受访者有机会接受相关培训(显著低于在美国进行的一项研究),并且只有三分之一的人认为机构和导师会定期关注这一问题。此外,我们注意到不同学科之间存在某些差异。该研究还表明,许多年轻研究人员觉得他们因资深同事的不当行为和现有的机构文化而面临问题。研究结果表明需要更好的预防机制、培训和提高认识活动。最好让初级研究人员在塑造诚信文化方面发挥积极作用。应该指出的是,所呈现的结果应在小规模调查所带来的局限性背景下加以考虑。本文鼓励就研究诚信实践开展进一步的研究活动,以便为欧洲和世界其他地区年轻研究人员的态度和经历提供更有力的证据。

相似文献

1
Research Integrity Practices from the Perspective of Early-Career Researchers.早期职业研究人员视角下的科研诚信实践
Sci Eng Ethics. 2015 Oct;21(5):1181-96. doi: 10.1007/s11948-014-9607-z. Epub 2014 Oct 26.
2
In Their Own Words: Research Misconduct from the Perspective of Researchers in Malaysian Universities.从马来西亚大学研究人员的角度看科研不端行为
Sci Eng Ethics. 2018 Dec;24(6):1755-1776. doi: 10.1007/s11948-017-9997-9. Epub 2017 Dec 16.
3
Malaysian researchers talk about the influence of culture on research misconduct in higher learning institutions.马来西亚研究人员探讨了文化对高等学府研究不端行为的影响。
Account Res. 2017;24(8):469-482. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2017.1399358.
4
Is failure to raise concerns about misconduct a breach of integrity? Researchers' reflections on reporting misconduct.未能对不当行为提出关注是否违反诚信原则?研究人员对举报不当行为的反思。
Account Res. 2018;25(6):311-339. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2018.1493577. Epub 2018 Jul 13.
5
Associations between attitudes towards scientific misconduct and self-reported behavior.对科研不端行为的态度与自我报告行为之间的关联。
Account Res. 2018;25(5):290-300. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2018.1485493. Epub 2018 Jun 25.
6
Prevention over cure: the administrative rationale for education in the responsible conduct of research.预防胜于治疗:负责任研究行为教育的管理依据。
Acad Med. 2007 Sep;82(9):835-7. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f7e0b.
7
What do mentoring and training in the responsible conduct of research have to do with scientists' misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-funded scientists.科研行为责任方面的指导与培训和科学家的不当行为有何关系?来自一项对美国国立卫生研究院资助科学家的全国性调查的结果。
Acad Med. 2007 Sep;82(9):853-60. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f764c.
8
Emphasizing the experiences of researchers after RCR instructions: Introduction to Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) in Malaysia.强调研究者在接受研究伦理指导后的经验:马来西亚负责任研究行为(RCR)简介。
Account Res. 2019 Apr;26(3):157-175. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2019.1607312. Epub 2019 May 5.
9
Collecting and characterizing existing and freely accessible research integrity educational resources.收集和描述现有的、可自由获取的研究诚信教育资源。
Account Res. 2020 May;27(4):195-211. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2020.1736571. Epub 2020 Mar 9.
10
Integrity in Postgraduate Research: The Student Voice.研究生研究中的诚信:学生的声音。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2015 Dec;21(6):1657-72. doi: 10.1007/s11948-014-9616-y. Epub 2014 Dec 9.

引用本文的文献

1
Reverse mentoring to enhance research integrity climate.反向指导以增强研究诚信风气。
BMC Res Notes. 2022 Jun 17;15(1):209. doi: 10.1186/s13104-022-06098-w.
2
Stakeholders' perspectives on research integrity training practices: a qualitative study.利益相关者对研究诚信培训实践的看法:一项定性研究。
BMC Med Ethics. 2021 May 28;22(1):67. doi: 10.1186/s12910-021-00637-z.
3
Expanding Research Integrity: A Cultural-Practice Perspective.拓展研究诚信:文化实践视角。

本文引用的文献

1
The Swedish Research Council's definition of 'scientific misconduct': a critique.瑞典研究理事会对“科研不端行为”的定义:一项批评意见。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2015 Feb;21(1):115-26. doi: 10.1007/s11948-014-9523-2. Epub 2014 Feb 1.
2
Improving ERC ethical standards.
Science. 2013 Sep 6;341(6150):1043. doi: 10.1126/science.1244098.
3
Ensuring PhD development of responsible conduct of research behaviors: who's responsible?确保博士生培养负责任的研究行为:谁来负责?
Sci Eng Ethics. 2014 Mar;20(1):221-35. doi: 10.1007/s11948-013-9437-4. Epub 2013 May 18.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2021 Feb 9;27(1):10. doi: 10.1007/s11948-021-00291-z.
4
Research Integrity Among PhD Students at the Faculty of Medicine: A Comparison of Three Scandinavian Universities.医学专业博士生的研究诚信:三所斯堪的纳维亚大学的比较。
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2020 Oct;15(4):320-329. doi: 10.1177/1556264620929230. Epub 2020 Jun 12.
5
How do researchers acquire and develop notions of research integrity? A qualitative study among biomedical researchers in Switzerland.研究人员如何获得和发展研究诚信观念?瑞士生物医学研究人员的定性研究。
BMC Med Ethics. 2019 Oct 16;20(1):72. doi: 10.1186/s12910-019-0410-x.
6
Research Ethics: Researchers Consider How Best to Prevent Misconduct in Research in Malaysian Higher Learning Institutions Through Ethics Education.研究伦理:马来西亚高等学府的研究人员通过伦理教育,考虑如何最好地预防研究中的不当行为。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2019 Aug;25(4):1111-1124. doi: 10.1007/s11948-018-0054-0. Epub 2018 May 1.
7
In Their Own Words: Research Misconduct from the Perspective of Researchers in Malaysian Universities.从马来西亚大学研究人员的角度看科研不端行为
Sci Eng Ethics. 2018 Dec;24(6):1755-1776. doi: 10.1007/s11948-017-9997-9. Epub 2017 Dec 16.
8
Plagiarism, Cheating and Research Integrity: Case Studies from a Masters Program in Peru.抄袭、作弊与研究诚信:来自秘鲁一个硕士项目的案例研究
Sci Eng Ethics. 2017 Aug;23(4):1183-1197. doi: 10.1007/s11948-016-9820-z. Epub 2016 Nov 15.
9
Authorship Issues and Conflict in the U.S. Academic Chemical Community.美国学术化学界的作者身份问题与冲突。
Account Res. 2015;22(6):346-83. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2015.1047707.
4
Research ethics. Global research integrity training.研究伦理。全球研究诚信培训。
Science. 2013 May 3;340(6132):552-3. doi: 10.1126/science.1236373.
5
Publication ethics from the perspective of PhD students of health sciences: a limited experience.从健康科学博士生的角度看出版伦理:有限的经验。
Sci Eng Ethics. 2012 Jun;18(2):213-22. doi: 10.1007/s11948-011-9256-4. Epub 2011 Feb 12.
6
Scientific misconduct. Misconduct by postdocs leads to retraction of papers.科研不端行为。博士后的不当行为导致论文被撤回。
Science. 2010 Sep 24;329(5999):1583. doi: 10.1126/science.329.5999.1583.
7
Research integrity and publication ethics.研究诚信与出版伦理。
Atherosclerosis. 2010 Oct;212(2):383-5. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2010.01.050. Epub 2010 Feb 18.
8
Scientific dishonesty--questionnaire to doctoral students in Sweden.科学不端行为——对瑞典博士生的问卷调查。
J Med Ethics. 2010 May;36(5):315-8. doi: 10.1136/jme.2009.033654. Epub 2010 May 3.
9
Credit where credit is due? Regulation, research integrity and the attribution of authorship in the health sciences.有其功而受其赏?规制、研究诚信与健康科学领域的作者署名
Soc Sci Med. 2010 May;70(9):1458-65. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.01.013. Epub 2010 Feb 12.
10
Mentoring and research misconduct: an analysis of research mentoring in closed ORI cases.指导与研究不当行为:对美国研究诚信办公室(ORI)已结案案例中的研究指导情况分析
Sci Eng Ethics. 2008 Sep;14(3):323-36. doi: 10.1007/s11948-008-9074-5. Epub 2008 Jul 10.