Literature DB >> 30604356

What Explains Associations of Researchers' Nation of Origin and Scores on a Measure of Professional Decision-Making? Exploring Key Variables and Interpretation of Scores.

Alison L Antes1, Tammy English2, Kari A Baldwin1, James M DuBois3.   

Abstract

Researchers encounter challenges that require making complex professional decisions. Strategies such as seeking help and anticipating consequences support decision-making in these situations. Existing evidence on a measure of professional decision-making in research (the PDR) that assesses the use of decision-making strategies revealed that NIH-funded researchers born outside of the U.S. tended to score below their U.S. counterparts. To examine potential explanations for this association, this study recruited 101 researchers born in the United States and 102 born internationally to complete the PDR and measures of basic personal values, values in scientific work, discrimination between the seriousness of rules in research, exposure to unprofessional research practices, and acculturation to American culture. Several variables were associated with PDR scores-discrimination between types of rules in research, exposure to unprofessional research practices, acculturation, and the basic personal values of power, security, and benevolence. However, only security, benevolence, acculturation, and rule discrimination were also associated with nation of origin. In multivariate models, the variance explained by these variables in accounting for the association of nation of origin and PDR scores was somewhat overlapping, thus, only security and benevolence remained as unique, statistically significant predictors. Thus, this study identified some important variables in the association of nation of origin and PDR, but more research is needed. In a secondary analysis to examine the "clinical significance" (the practical importance) of scores on the PDR, this study examined aggregated PDR score data from the present sample and past samples of investigators. This analysis identified scores that may suggest a concern versus those scores that may be interpreted as excellent, proficient, or marginal. Implications for training and mentoring, along with considerations for future research are discussed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Culture; Decision-making; Nation of origin; Professionalism

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30604356      PMCID: PMC6606404          DOI: 10.1007/s11948-018-0077-6

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


  29 in total

1.  Values and behavior: strength and structure of relations.

Authors:  Anat Bardi; Shalom H Schwartz
Journal:  Pers Soc Psychol Bull       Date:  2003-10

2.  Culture and social support: who seeks it and why?

Authors:  Shelley E Taylor; David K Sherman; Heejung S Kim; Johanna Jarcho; Kaori Takagi; Melissa S Dunagan
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2004-09

3.  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.

Authors:  Melissa S Anderson; Aaron S Horn; Kelly R Risbey; Emily A Ronning; Raymond De Vries; Brian C Martinson
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 6.893

4.  A Comparison of the Effects of Ethics Training on International and US Students.

Authors:  Logan M Steele; James F Johnson; Logan L Watts; Alexandra E MacDougall; Michael D Mumford; Shane Connelly; T H Lee Williams
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 3.525

5.  Misconduct: Lessons from researcher rehab.

Authors:  James M DuBois; John T Chibnall; Raymond Tait; Jillon Vander Wal
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2016-06-09       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Using name lists to infer Asian racial/ethnic subgroups in the healthcare setting.

Authors:  Eric C Wong; Latha P Palaniappan; Diane S Lauderdale
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  Development and Preliminary Validation of a New Measure of Values in Scientific Work.

Authors:  Tammy English; Alison L Antes; Kari A Baldwin; James M DuBois
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2017-06-08       Impact factor: 3.525

8.  Field and Experience Influences on Ethical Decision-Making in the Sciences.

Authors:  Michael D Mumford; Shane Connelly; Stephen T Murphy; Lynn D Devenport; Alison L Antes; Ryan P Brown; Jason H Hill; Ethan P Waples
Journal:  Ethics Behav       Date:  2009-07-01

9.  Cross-cultural considerations in U.S. research ethics education.

Authors:  Elizabeth Heitman
Journal:  J Microbiol Biol Educ       Date:  2014-12-15

10.  The Professionalism and Integrity in Research Program: Description and Preliminary Outcomes.

Authors:  James M DuBois; John T Chibnall; Raymond Tait; Jillon S Vander Wal
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 6.893

View more
  2 in total

1.  Assessing the climate for research ethics in labs: Development and validation of a brief measure.

Authors:  Erin D Solomon; Tammy English; Matthew Wroblewski; James M DuBois; Alison L Antes
Journal:  Account Res       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 2.622

2.  Professional decision-making in medicine: Development of a new measure and preliminary evidence of validity.

Authors:  Alison L Antes; Kelly K Dineen; Erin Bakanas; Tyler Zahrli; Jason D Keune; Matthew J Schuelke; James M DuBois
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-02-07       Impact factor: 3.240

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.