Co-creating Research Integrity Education Guidelines for Research Institutions.

IF 2.7 2区 哲学 Q1 ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Science and Engineering Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-20 DOI:10.1007/s11948-023-00444-2
Krishma Labib, Natalie Evans, Daniel Pizzolato, Noémie Aubert Bonn, Guy Widdershoven, Lex Bouter, Teodora Konach, Miranda Langendam, Kris Dierickx, Joeri Tijdink
{"title":"Co-creating Research Integrity Education Guidelines for Research Institutions.","authors":"Krishma Labib,&nbsp;Natalie Evans,&nbsp;Daniel Pizzolato,&nbsp;Noémie Aubert Bonn,&nbsp;Guy Widdershoven,&nbsp;Lex Bouter,&nbsp;Teodora Konach,&nbsp;Miranda Langendam,&nbsp;Kris Dierickx,&nbsp;Joeri Tijdink","doi":"10.1007/s11948-023-00444-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To foster research integrity (RI), research institutions should develop a continuous RI education approach, addressing various target groups. To support institutions to achieve this, we developed RI education guidelines together with RI experts and research administrators, exploring similarities and differences in recommendations across target groups, as well as recommendations about RI education using approaches other than formal RI training. We used an iterative co-creative process. We conducted four half-day online co-creation workshops with 16 participants in total, which were informed by the RI education evidence-base. In the first two workshops, participants generated ideas for guidelines' content, focusing on different target groups and various approaches to RI education. Based on this content we developed first drafts of the guidelines. Participants in the third and fourth workshop refined those drafts. We next organized a working group which further prioritized, reorganized, and optimized the content of the guidelines. We developed four guidelines on RI education focusing on (a) bachelor, master and PhD students; (b) post-doctorate and senior researchers; (c) other RI stakeholders; as well as (d) continuous RI education. Across guidelines, we recommend mandatory RI training; follow-up refresher training; informal discussions about RI; appropriate rewards and incentives for active participation in RI education; and evaluation of RI educational events. Our work provides experience-based co-created guidance to research institutions on what to consider when developing a successful RI education strategy. Each guideline is offered as a distinct, publicly available tool in our toolbox ( www.sops4ri.eu/toolbox ) which institutions can access, adapt and implement to meet their institution-specific RI education needs.Trial registration https://osf.io/zej5b .</p>","PeriodicalId":49564,"journal":{"name":"Science and Engineering Ethics","volume":"29 4","pages":"28"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10359202/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Engineering Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-023-00444-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

To foster research integrity (RI), research institutions should develop a continuous RI education approach, addressing various target groups. To support institutions to achieve this, we developed RI education guidelines together with RI experts and research administrators, exploring similarities and differences in recommendations across target groups, as well as recommendations about RI education using approaches other than formal RI training. We used an iterative co-creative process. We conducted four half-day online co-creation workshops with 16 participants in total, which were informed by the RI education evidence-base. In the first two workshops, participants generated ideas for guidelines' content, focusing on different target groups and various approaches to RI education. Based on this content we developed first drafts of the guidelines. Participants in the third and fourth workshop refined those drafts. We next organized a working group which further prioritized, reorganized, and optimized the content of the guidelines. We developed four guidelines on RI education focusing on (a) bachelor, master and PhD students; (b) post-doctorate and senior researchers; (c) other RI stakeholders; as well as (d) continuous RI education. Across guidelines, we recommend mandatory RI training; follow-up refresher training; informal discussions about RI; appropriate rewards and incentives for active participation in RI education; and evaluation of RI educational events. Our work provides experience-based co-created guidance to research institutions on what to consider when developing a successful RI education strategy. Each guideline is offered as a distinct, publicly available tool in our toolbox ( www.sops4ri.eu/toolbox ) which institutions can access, adapt and implement to meet their institution-specific RI education needs.Trial registration https://osf.io/zej5b .

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
共同制定科研机构科研诚信教育指南。
为了促进研究诚信,研究机构应该发展一种持续的研究诚信教育方法,针对不同的目标群体。为了支持各机构达成此目标,我们与国际扶轮专家及研究行政人员一起制定了国际扶轮教育指导方针,探讨不同目标群体间建议的异同,以及有关使用国际扶轮正式训练以外的方法进行国际扶轮教育的建议。我们使用了一个迭代的共同创造过程。我们举办了四个半天的线上共同创作工作坊,共有16位参与者,这些工作坊是由国际扶轮教育证据基础所通知的。在前两个工作坊中,参与者对指导方针的内容产生想法,聚焦于不同的目标群体和各种国际扶轮教育的方法。基于这些内容,我们制定了指南的初稿。第三次和第四次讲习班的与会者对这些草案进行了改进。接下来,我们组织了一个工作组,对指南的内容进行了进一步的排序、重组和优化。我们制定了四项国际扶轮教育指导方针,重点关注(a)学士、硕士和博士学生;(b)博士后和高级研究人员;(c)其他国际扶轮持份者;以及(d)持续的国际扶轮教育。在指导方针中,我们建议强制性的国际扶轮训练;后续进修培训;关于国际扶轮的非正式讨论;对积极参与国际扶轮教育的适当奖励与激励;以及评估国际扶轮的教育活动。我们的工作为研究机构提供基于经验的共同创造指导,指导他们在制定成功的国际扶轮教育策略时应考虑什么。每个指南都是作为我们工具箱(www.sops4ri.eu/toolbox)中一个独特的、公开可用的工具提供的,机构可以访问、调整和实施以满足其机构特定的国际扶轮教育需求。试用注册https://osf.io/zej5b。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Science and Engineering Ethics
Science and Engineering Ethics 综合性期刊-工程:综合
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
5.40%
发文量
54
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Science and Engineering Ethics is an international multidisciplinary journal dedicated to exploring ethical issues associated with science and engineering, covering professional education, research and practice as well as the effects of technological innovations and research findings on society. While the focus of this journal is on science and engineering, contributions from a broad range of disciplines, including social sciences and humanities, are welcomed. Areas of interest include, but are not limited to, ethics of new and emerging technologies, research ethics, computer ethics, energy ethics, animals and human subjects ethics, ethics education in science and engineering, ethics in design, biomedical ethics, values in technology and innovation. We welcome contributions that deal with these issues from an international perspective, particularly from countries that are underrepresented in these discussions.
期刊最新文献
Awareness of Jordanian Researchers About Predatory Journals: A Need for Training. Empathy's Role in Engineering Ethics: Empathizing with One's Self to Others Across the Globe. "Business as usual"? Safe-by-Design Vis-à-Vis Proclaimed Safety Cultures in Technology Development for the Bioeconomy. Justifying Our Credences in the Trustworthiness of AI Systems: A Reliabilistic Approach. Know Thyself, Improve Thyself: Personalized LLMs for Self-Knowledge and Moral Enhancement.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1