Instances of unethical performance of academic faculty members in conducting and publishing research works.

IF 1.4 Q3 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Journal of Education and Health Promotion Pub Date : 2024-07-29 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.4103/jehp.jehp_73_24
Rahele Samouei, Narges Meshkineh, Shahin Mojiri
{"title":"Instances of unethical performance of academic faculty members in conducting and publishing research works.","authors":"Rahele Samouei, Narges Meshkineh, Shahin Mojiri","doi":"10.4103/jehp.jehp_73_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Today, compliance with ethical principles and standards has become a concern of research ethics committees more than in the past, and the informed society is more demanding of researchers' considerations and adherence. In this regard, a survey was conducted with the aim of determining instances of unethical behavior of faculty members in conducting and publishing research works.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study was performed cross-sectional with 100 faculty members answering in the form of systematic random sampling from the scientific measurement system of the Ministry of Health of Iran in August 2023 and testing using a checklist containing 32 examples of unethical research behavior. The data were reported using descriptive statistics and analytical methods such as Student's <i>t</i>-test and analysis of variance.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The findings of this study showed some instances of unethical practice in the field of research by the respondents, including submitting the article instead of the corresponding author, adding a guest author in the article, mentioning untrue affiliation, not observing the conflict of interest, conducting judgment with connivance, overlapping publications, manipulation of results, and other cases according to the findings of the text of the article, which was reported in professors of the master's degree with a higher average (0.001, 7.12), but according to the gender and academic rank of the respondents, no significant difference was observed in the averages.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings of this study show some clear instances of unethical practices in the field of research among faculty members and academic groups, and it requires targeted planning and more seriousness to investigate and manage its causes. The results of the study can be used for scientific groups and individuals who are directly and indirectly affected by the research results and researchers' performance.</p>","PeriodicalId":15581,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Education and Health Promotion","volume":"13 ","pages":"286"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11414881/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Education and Health Promotion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_73_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Today, compliance with ethical principles and standards has become a concern of research ethics committees more than in the past, and the informed society is more demanding of researchers' considerations and adherence. In this regard, a survey was conducted with the aim of determining instances of unethical behavior of faculty members in conducting and publishing research works.

Materials and methods: This study was performed cross-sectional with 100 faculty members answering in the form of systematic random sampling from the scientific measurement system of the Ministry of Health of Iran in August 2023 and testing using a checklist containing 32 examples of unethical research behavior. The data were reported using descriptive statistics and analytical methods such as Student's t-test and analysis of variance.

Results: The findings of this study showed some instances of unethical practice in the field of research by the respondents, including submitting the article instead of the corresponding author, adding a guest author in the article, mentioning untrue affiliation, not observing the conflict of interest, conducting judgment with connivance, overlapping publications, manipulation of results, and other cases according to the findings of the text of the article, which was reported in professors of the master's degree with a higher average (0.001, 7.12), but according to the gender and academic rank of the respondents, no significant difference was observed in the averages.

Conclusion: The findings of this study show some clear instances of unethical practices in the field of research among faculty members and academic groups, and it requires targeted planning and more seriousness to investigate and manage its causes. The results of the study can be used for scientific groups and individuals who are directly and indirectly affected by the research results and researchers' performance.

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
学术教师在开展和发表研究工作时的不道德行为。
背景:如今,与过去相比,遵守伦理原则和标准已成为研究伦理委员会关注的问题,知情社会对研究人员的考虑和遵守提出了更高的要求。为此,我们开展了一项调查,旨在确定教职员工在开展和发表研究工作时的不道德行为:本研究于 2023 年 8 月从伊朗卫生部的科学测量系统中以系统随机抽样的形式抽取了 100 名教职员工进行横向调查,并使用包含 32 个不道德研究行为实例的核对表进行测试。数据报告采用了描述性统计以及学生 t 检验和方差分析等分析方法:本研究结果显示,受访者在研究领域存在一些不道德行为,包括代替通讯作者投稿、在文章中添加特邀作者、提及不真实的所属单位、不遵守利益冲突、纵容他人进行判断、重复发表文章、篡改结果等情况,根据文章文本的调查结果,硕士学位教授的平均报告率较高(0.001,7.12),但根据受访者的性别和学术级别,平均值没有观察到显著差异:本研究结果表明,教师和学术团体在科研领域存在一些明显的不道德行为,需要有针对性地制定计划,并更加严肃地调查和管理其原因。研究结果可供直接或间接受研究成果和研究人员表现影响的科研团体和个人参考。
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
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
21.40%
发文量
218
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊最新文献
"The feedback dilemma"-provider and learner perspectives regarding the barriers and facilitators for giving and receiving feedback in medical education: A parallel mixed methods approach. Appraisal the structure of diabetes self-management education and support in diabetes education units of Isfahan, Iran. Assessing the relationship between dyslexia, psychological distress, and academic self-efficacy among Nigerian university undergraduates. Assessment of self-satisfaction, happiness, and quality of life (QoL) among adults: An online survey. Attitude of the health team to the infant home care plan during the COVID-19 pandemic: A cross-sectional study.
×
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