Literature DB >> 26940319

Research Misconduct in the Croatian Scientific Community: A Survey Assessing the Forms and Characteristics of Research Misconduct.

Vanja Pupovac1, Snježana Prijić-Samaržija2, Mladen Petrovečki3,4.   

Abstract

The prevalence and characteristics of research misconduct have mainly been studied in highly developed countries. In moderately or poorly developed countries such as Croatia, data on research misconduct are scarce. The primary aim of this study was to determine the rates at which scientists report committing or observing the most serious forms of research misconduct, such as falsification , fabrication, plagiarism, and violation of authorship rules in the Croatian scientific community. Additionally, we sought to determine the degree of development and the extent of implementation of the system for defining and regulating research misconduct in a typical scientific community in Croatia. An anonymous questionnaire was distributed among 1232 Croatian scientists at the University of Rijeka in 2012/2013 and 237 (19.2 %) returned the survey. Based on the respondents who admitted having committed research misconduct, 9 (3.8 %) admitted to plagiarism, 22 (9.3 %) to data falsification, 9 (3.8 %) to data fabrication, and 60 (25.3 %) respondents admitted to violation of authorship rules. Based on the respondents who admitted having observed research misconduct of fellow scientists, 72 (30.4 %) observed plagiarism, 69 (29.1 %) observed data falsification, 46 (19.4 %) observed data fabrication, and 132 (55.7 %) respondents admitted having observed violation of authorship rules. The results of our study indicate that the efficacy of the system for managing research misconduct in Croatia is poor. At the University of Rijeka there is no document dedicated exclusively to research integrity, describing the values that should be fostered by a scientist and clarifying the forms of research misconduct and what constitutes a questionable research practice. Scientists do not trust ethical bodies and the system for defining and regulating research misconduct; therefore the observed cases of research misconduct are rarely reported. Finally, Croatian scientists are not formally educated about responsible conduct of research at any level of their formal education. All mentioned indicate possible reasons for higher rates of research misconduct among Croatian scientists in comparison with scientists in highly developed countries.

Keywords:  Institutional policies and procedures; Questionable research practices; Research integrity; Research misconduct

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26940319     DOI: 10.1007/s11948-016-9767-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics        ISSN: 1353-3452            Impact factor:   3.525


  29 in total

1.  Ethical issues in biomedical research: perceptions and practices of postdoctoral research fellows responding to a survey.

Authors:  Susan Eastwood; Pamela Derish; Evangeline Leash; Stephen Ordway
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 3.525

2.  Students come to medical schools prepared to cheat: a multi-campus investigation.

Authors:  Sunčana Kukolja Taradi; Milan Taradi; Tin Knežević; Zoran Đogaš
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2010-08-25       Impact factor: 2.903

3.  Prevalence of plagiarism among medical students.

Authors:  Lidija Bilić-Zulle; Vedran Frković; Tamara Turk; Josip Azman; Mladen Petrovecki
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 1.351

4.  Fostering integrity in research: definitions, current knowledge, and future directions.

Authors:  Nicholas H Steneck
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 3.525

5.  Scientists' perceptions of organizational justice and self-reported misbehaviors.

Authors:  Brian C Martinson; Melissa S Anderson; A Lauren Crain; Raymond de Vries
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 1.742

Review 6.  Role of systematic reviews in detecting plagiarism: case of Asim Kurjak.

Authors:  Iain Chalmers
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-09-16

7.  Is there an effective approach to deterring students from plagiarizing?

Authors:  Lidija Bilic-Zulle; Josip Azman; Vedran Frkovic; Mladen Petrovecki
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2007-11-08       Impact factor: 3.525

8.  Factors associated with research wrongdoing in Nigeria.

Authors:  Omokhoa A Adeleye; Clement A Adebamowo
Journal:  J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 1.742

9.  Do Croatian open access journals support ethical research? Content analysis of instructions to authors.

Authors:  Jadranka Stojanovski
Journal:  Biochem Med (Zagreb)       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.313

10.  Misconduct in research: a descriptive survey of attitudes, perceptions and associated factors in a developing country.

Authors:  Patrick I Okonta; Theresa Rossouw
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2014-03-25       Impact factor: 2.652

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Plagiarism: A silent epidemic in scientific writing - Reasons, recognition and remedies.

Authors:  Jyotindu Debnath
Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India       Date:  2016-04-16

2.  Perceptions of Chinese Biomedical Researchers Towards Academic Misconduct: A Comparison Between 2015 and 2010.

Authors:  Qing-Jiao Liao; Yuan-Yuan Zhang; Yu-Chen Fan; Ming-Hua Zheng; Yu Bai; Guy D Eslick; Xing-Xiang He; Shi-Bing Zhang; Harry Hua-Xiang Xia; Hua He
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2017-04-10       Impact factor: 3.525

3.  Psychometric properties of Persian version of the research misconduct questionnaire (PRMQ).

Authors:  Erfan Shamsoddin; Leila Janani; Kiandokht Ghamari; Payam Kabiri; Ehsan Shamsi Gooshki; Bita Mesgarpour
Journal:  J Med Ethics Hist Med       Date:  2020-11-10

4.  Questionable Research Practices and Misconduct Among Norwegian Researchers.

Authors:  Matthias Kaiser; Laura Drivdal; Johs Hjellbrekke; Helene Ingierd; Ole Bjørn Rekdal
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2021-12-21       Impact factor: 3.525

5.  Perceptions of plagiarism by biomedical researchers: an online survey in Europe and China.

Authors:  Nannan Yi; Benoit Nemery; Kris Dierickx
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 2.652

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.