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
  • [41] Honor Codes: Evidence Based Strategies for Improving Academic Integrity
    Tatum, Holly
    Schwartz, Beth M.
    THEORY INTO PRACTICE, 2017, 56 (02) : 129 - 135
  • [42] SCORECARD FOR ACADEMIC INTEGRITY DEVELOPMENT: BENCHMARKS AND EVALUATION OF INSTITUTIONAL STRATEGIES
    Glendinning, Irene
    PLAGIARISM ACROSS EUROPE AND BEYOND 2017, 2017, : 25 - 34
  • [43] A model academic ethics and integrity policy for computer science departments
    Riedesel, Charles P.
    Manley, Eric D.
    Poser, Susan
    Deogun, Jitender S.
    SIGCSE Bulletin Inroads, 2009, 41 (01): : 357 - 361
  • [44] Promoting translational research in academic health centers: Navigating the "roadmap"
    Cripe, TP
    Thomson, B
    Boat, TF
    Williams, DA
    ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 2005, 80 (11) : 1012 - 1018
  • [45] Business strategies for the survival of the academic medical center
    Chessare, JB
    Herrick, RR
    ACADEMIC MEDICINE, 1996, 71 (03) : 215 - 217
  • [46] Scientific Integrity and Transparency in Academic Writing: The Foundation of Credible Science
    Wedderkopp, Niels
    Rutz, Erich
    CHILDREN-BASEL, 2024, 11 (10):
  • [47] Curating the Future of Research: Navigating FAIR Challenges in Academic Repositories
    Bote-Vericad, Juan-Jose
    EminaAdilovich
    Caellas-Camprubi, Anna
    Labastida, Ignasi
    DESIDOC JOURNAL OF LIBRARY & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, 2024, 44 (05): : 284 - 288
  • [48] Academic Integrity Support System for Educational Institution
    Zharikova, Maryna
    Sherstjuk, Vladimir
    2017 IEEE FIRST UKRAINE CONFERENCE ON ELECTRICAL AND COMPUTER ENGINEERING (UKRCON), 2017, : 1212 - 1215
  • [49] ACADEMIC SCIENCE AS A SYSTEM OF MARKETS
    ZIMAN, J
    HIGHER EDUCATION QUARTERLY, 1991, 45 (01) : 41 - 61
  • [50] Navigating research strategy, clinical integrity, and current global regulatory compliance
    Schneider, Sandra L.
    IN VITRO CELLULAR & DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY-ANIMAL, 2008, 44 : S10 - S10