Navigating the Science System: Research Integrity and Academic Survival Strategies

被引:0
|
作者
Andrea Reyes Elizondo
Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner
机构
[1] Leiden University,Centre for Science and Technology Studies
关键词
Research integrity; Questionable research practices; Epistemology; Labor; Research culture;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Research Integrity (RI) is high on the agenda of both institutions and science policy. The European Union as well as national ministries of science have launched ambitious initiatives to combat misconduct and breaches of research integrity. Often, such initiatives entail attempts to regulate scientific behavior through guidelines that institutions and academic communities can use to more easily identify and deal with cases of misconduct. Rather than framing misconduct as a result of an information deficit, we instead conceptualize Questionable Research Practices (QRPs) as attempts by researchers to reconcile epistemic and social forms of uncertainty in knowledge production. Drawing on previous literature, we define epistemic uncertainty as the inherent intellectual unpredictability of scientific inquiry, while social uncertainty arises from the human-made conditions for scientific work. Our core argument—developed on the basis of 30 focus group interviews with researchers across different fields and European countries—is that breaches of research integrity can be understood as attempts to loosen overly tight coupling between the two forms of uncertainty. Our analytical approach is not meant to relativize or excuse misconduct, but rather to offer a more fine-grained perspective on what exactly it is that researchers want to accomplish by engaging in it. Based on the analysis, we conclude by proposing some concrete ways in which institutions and academic communities could try to reconcile epistemic and social uncertainties on a more collective level, thereby reducing incentives for researchers to engage in misconduct.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Research Integrity and Everyday Practice of Science
    Frederick Grinnell
    Science and Engineering Ethics, 2013, 19 : 685 - 701
  • [32] Research Integrity and Everyday Practice of Science
    Grinnell, Frederick
    SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS, 2013, 19 (03) : 685 - 701
  • [33] Navigating challenges in social science research: the impact of halo effect and inadequate academic socialization on Chinese young researchers
    Jiang, Xiaohua
    STUDIES IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2025, 50 (01) : 64 - 79
  • [34] Soft skills of chemical research: Academic integrity and research ethics
    Wrublewski, Donna
    Leonard, Michelle
    Buhler, Amy
    Bharti, Neelam
    ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY, 2015, 250
  • [35] Navigating the Biomedical Research System as a Full Participant: Strategies and Opportunities for the Nuclear Medicine Technologist
    Schleipman, A. Robert
    JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY, 2007, 35 (03) : 170 - 175
  • [36] Research integrity and academic medicine: the pressure to publish and research misconduct
    Kearney, Molly
    Downing, Maren
    Gignac, Elizabeth A.
    JOURNAL OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE, 2024, 124 (05): : 187 - 194
  • [38] Academic Freedom Legislation: The Latest Effort to Undermine the Integrity of Science and Science Education
    Binns, Ian C.
    JOURNAL OF SCIENCE TEACHER EDUCATION, 2013, 24 (04) : 589 - 595
  • [39] The metrics maze in science: navigating academic evaluation without journalistic pressures
    Alviggi, Carlo
    Nappi, Rossella E.
    La Marca, Antonio
    Ubaldi, Filippo Maria
    Vaiarelli, Alberto
    REPRODUCTIVE BIOMEDICINE ONLINE, 2024, 49 (01)
  • [40] Navigating the Vast Landscape of Academic Research Databases: A Guide for Researchers
    Farooq, Muhammad
    Majid, Hafsa
    Effendi, Muhammad Umer Naeem
    JCPSP-JOURNAL OF THE COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS PAKISTAN, 2024, 34 (09): : 1143 - 1144