Cao Yuan, Jiang Yuwei, Zhao Yong
Library of China Agricultural University, Beijing, China.
Front Res Metr Anal. 2023 Feb 10;8:943228. doi: 10.3389/frma.2023.943228. eCollection 2023.
This study outlines a comprehensive analysis of the primary characteristics of managing research integrity (RI) in domestic colleges and universities in China. RI education in China consists primarily of soft advocacy, with no hard requirements or continuous and systematic support. Together with other stakeholders, such as funders and publishers, higher education institutions (e.g., colleges and universities) are one of the vital actors that have a lot of influence on RI promotion and implementation among researchers. However, the literature on the regulation of RI policies in China's universities is limited.
We investigate the top 50 colleges and universities in the 2021 Best Chinese Universities Ranking. Their guidance and policy documents on RI were collected via their official websites. By integrating the use of scientometrics analysis, including descriptive statistical analysis, inductive content analysis, and quantitative analysis, we examine whether and how these higher education institutions respond to national policies in a timely manner, especially in terms of their frequency of updates, topic clustering analysis, terms clustering analysis, content aggregation. To further understand the composition mechanism and the main working systems of university RI management organizations, we conducted in-depth research on the organizational functions, meeting system, staff composition mechanism, and scientific research misconduct acceptance and investigation mechanisms.
The regulations on the treatment of RI in China's universities have, in response to the government's call to establish their own management policies and working mechanisms, maintained a zero-tolerance stance on research misconduct. The sampled universities listed the definition and principles of misconduct practices, investigation procedures, and sanctions of research misconduct in their own policy documents. Some of them listed inappropriate research practices All 50 sampled universities have formed relevant organizations responsible for RI management, they all provide the detailed regulations of the committees. Yet, there is still a need to further define Questionable Research Practice, foster higher standards for integrity in research and, establish and improve an efficient, authoritative, well-restrained and supervision working mechanism for organizations responsible for RI treatment.
本研究概述了对中国国内高校科研诚信管理主要特征的全面分析。中国的科研诚信教育主要是软性倡导,没有硬性要求或持续系统的支持。高等教育机构(如学院和大学)与资助者和出版商等其他利益相关者一样,是对科研人员中科研诚信推广和实施有重大影响的关键行为主体之一。然而,关于中国大学科研诚信政策监管的文献有限。
我们调查了2021年中国最好大学排名前50的高校。通过其官方网站收集了它们关于科研诚信的指导和政策文件。通过综合运用科学计量学分析,包括描述性统计分析、归纳性内容分析和定量分析,我们考察这些高等教育机构是否以及如何及时响应国家政策,特别是在更新频率、主题聚类分析、术语聚类分析、内容汇总方面。为了进一步了解大学科研诚信管理组织的构成机制和主要工作系统,我们对组织职能、会议制度、人员构成机制以及科研不端行为受理和调查机制进行了深入研究。
中国高校对科研诚信处理的规定响应政府建立自身管理政策和工作机制的号召,对科研不端行为保持零容忍态度。抽样高校在其自身政策文件中列出了不当行为的定义和原则、调查程序以及科研不端行为的制裁措施。其中一些列出了不当研究行为。所有50所抽样高校都成立了负责科研诚信管理的相关组织,它们都提供了委员会的详细规定。然而,仍有必要进一步界定有问题的研究行为,树立更高的科研诚信标准,并建立和完善针对负责科研诚信处理的组织的高效、权威、约束有力的监督工作机制。