Beyond the traditional: Extending academic libraries’ roles in research integrity based on the causes of research misconduct

IF 2.5 3区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Journal of Academic Librarianship Pub Date : 2024-04-19 DOI:10.1016/j.acalib.2024.102877
Wei Feng , Lihong Zhou , Junmin Xiao
{"title":"Beyond the traditional: Extending academic libraries’ roles in research integrity based on the causes of research misconduct","authors":"Wei Feng ,&nbsp;Lihong Zhou ,&nbsp;Junmin Xiao","doi":"10.1016/j.acalib.2024.102877","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper reports on an ongoing research project aiming to extend the roles of academic libraries in research integrity (RI) based on reexploring the causes of research misconduct (RM) and restructuring the relationships among them. Since the causes of RM have been thoroughly investigated, a systematic review approach was approved valid and adopted in this study. A total of 60 articles were selected and analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. The analysis pointed to 21 RM causes under four themes: individual, organizational, professional, and cultural causes. Three critical causes stand as the primary connectors among various causes: insufficient RI education and training, lack of explicit rules and regulations, and “publish or perish” pressure. On this basis, three key roles of academic libraries in RI services can be extended: RI educators and counselors, RI policy-making advisors, as well as evaluators of academic outcomes. As one of the earliest research projects that investigate the roles of academic libraries in RI based on RM causes, its findings can provide useful implications for formulating specific RI services in academic libraries.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47762,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Academic Librarianship","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Academic Librarianship","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0099133324000387","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper reports on an ongoing research project aiming to extend the roles of academic libraries in research integrity (RI) based on reexploring the causes of research misconduct (RM) and restructuring the relationships among them. Since the causes of RM have been thoroughly investigated, a systematic review approach was approved valid and adopted in this study. A total of 60 articles were selected and analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. The analysis pointed to 21 RM causes under four themes: individual, organizational, professional, and cultural causes. Three critical causes stand as the primary connectors among various causes: insufficient RI education and training, lack of explicit rules and regulations, and “publish or perish” pressure. On this basis, three key roles of academic libraries in RI services can be extended: RI educators and counselors, RI policy-making advisors, as well as evaluators of academic outcomes. As one of the earliest research projects that investigate the roles of academic libraries in RI based on RM causes, its findings can provide useful implications for formulating specific RI services in academic libraries.

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
超越传统:基于研究不当行为的原因,拓展学术图书馆在研究诚信方面的作用
本文报告了一个正在进行的研究项目,该项目旨在重新探讨研究不当行为(RM)的成因,并重构它们之间的关系,从而扩展学术图书馆在研究诚信(RI)方面的作用。由于研究人员已经对研究不端行为的原因进行了深入调查,因此本研究采用的系统综述方法是有效的。本研究共选取了 60 篇文章,并采用专题分析法对其进行了分析。分析结果表明,在个人原因、组织原因、专业原因和文化原因这四个主题下,共有 21 个 RM 原因。在各种原因中,有三个关键原因是主要的联系因素:风险教育和培训不足、缺乏明确的规章制度以及 "不发表就灭亡 "的压力。在此基础上,可以延伸出学术图书馆在 RI 服务中的三个关键角色:国际关系教育者和顾问、国际关系决策顾问以及学术成果评估者。作为最早研究基于RM成因的学术图书馆在RI中的角色的研究项目之一,其研究成果可以为学术图书馆制定具体的RI服务提供有益的启示。
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
Journal of Academic Librarianship
Journal of Academic Librarianship INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
120
审稿时长
29 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Academic Librarianship, an international and refereed journal, publishes articles that focus on problems and issues germane to college and university libraries. JAL provides a forum for authors to present research findings and, where applicable, their practical applications and significance; analyze policies, practices, issues, and trends; speculate about the future of academic librarianship; present analytical bibliographic essays and philosophical treatises. JAL also brings to the attention of its readers information about hundreds of new and recently published books in library and information science, management, scholarly communication, and higher education. JAL, in addition, covers management and discipline-based software and information policy developments.
期刊最新文献
Understanding feelings, thoughts, and actions: Social work students and individual research consultations Growth of Knowledge Synthesis in a University Setting: Types, Disciplines, and Librarian Involvement An interdisciplinary assessment of information literacy instruction A holistic approach to understanding undergraduates: Campus engagement, library use and psychological factors The lifecycle of 3D data in academic libraries: A survey of methods and implications for information professionals
×
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