Department of Research in Biomedicine and Health, University of Split School of Medicine, Šoltanska 2, 21000, Split, Croatia.
Cochrane Croatia, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2019 Feb;25(1):231-245. doi: 10.1007/s11948-017-9987-y. Epub 2017 Oct 25.
We determined the prevailing ethical climate at three different schools of a single university, in order to explore possible differences in the ethical climate related to different research fields: the School of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, and Naval Architecture; the School of Humanities and Social Sciences; and the School of Medicine. We used the Ethical Climate Questionnaire to survey the staff (teachers and administration) at the three schools, and used the research integrity and organizational climate (RIOC) survey for early-stage researchers at the three schools. The dominant ethical climate type perceived collectively at the three university schools (response rate 49%, n = 294) was Laws and professional codes, which is associated with the cosmopolitan level of analysis and the ethical construct of principle. Individually, the same climate predominated at the schools for engineering and humanities, but the School of Medicine had the Self-interest ethical climate, which is associated with the individual level of analysis and the egoism ethical construct. In the RIOC survey (response rate 85%; n = 70), early-stage researchers from the three university schools did not differ in their perceptions of the organizational research integrity climate, or in their perceived individual, group or organizational pressures. Our study is the first, to the best of our knowledge, to show differences in perceived ethical climate at a medical school compared to other schools at a university. Further studies are needed to explore the reasons for these differences and how they translate to organizational outcomes, such as job satisfaction, commitment to the institution and dysfunctional behaviour, including research misconduct.
我们确定了同一所大学的三个不同学院的主流伦理氛围，以探讨与不同研究领域相关的伦理氛围可能存在的差异：电气工程学院、机械工程学院和船舶建筑学院；人文社会科学学院；以及医学院。我们使用伦理气候问卷对这三所学校的教职员工（教师和管理人员）进行了调查，并对这三所学校的早期研究人员使用了研究诚信和组织氛围（RIOC）调查。这三所大学的三个学院（回应率 49%，n=294）普遍存在的主导伦理氛围类型是法律和专业规范，这与分析的世界主义水平和原则的伦理结构有关。就个人而言，同样的氛围在工程和人文学院占主导地位，但医学院则存在着自身利益的伦理氛围，这与个体分析水平和自我主义伦理结构有关。在 RIOC 调查（回应率 85%；n=70）中，这三所大学的早期研究人员在对组织研究诚信氛围的看法，以及对个人、群体或组织压力的看法方面没有差异。据我们所知，我们的研究首次表明，医学院的感知伦理氛围与大学的其他学院存在差异。需要进一步的研究来探讨这些差异的原因以及它们如何转化为组织成果，例如工作满意度、对机构的承诺和功能失调行为，包括研究不当行为。
