Open minds, tied hands: Awareness, behavior, and reasoning on open science and irresponsible research behavior.

IF 2.8 1区哲学 Q1 MEDICAL ETHICS Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-02-03 DOI:10.1080/08989621.2025.2457100

Wisnu Wiradhany, Farah M Djalal, Anique B H de Bruin

{"title":"Open minds, tied hands: Awareness, behavior, and reasoning on open science and irresponsible research behavior.","authors":"Wisnu Wiradhany, Farah M Djalal, Anique B H de Bruin","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2457100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Knowledge on Open Science Practices (OSP) has been promoted through responsible conduct of research training and the development of open science infrastructure to combat Irresponsible Research Behavior (IRB). Yet, there is limited evidence for the efficacy of OSP in minimizing IRB.Methods: We asked N=778 participants to fill in questionnaires that contain OSP and ethical reasoning vignettes, and report self-admission rates of IRB and personality traits.Results: We found that against our initial prediction, even though OSP was negatively correlated with IRB, this correlation was very weak, and upon controlling for individual differences factors, OSP neither predicted IRB nor was this relationship moderated by ethical reasoning. On the other hand, individual differences factors, namely dark personality triad, and conscientiousness and openness, contributed more to IRB than OSP knowledge.Conclusions: Our findings suggest that OSP knowledge needs to be complemented by the development of ethical virtues to encounter IRBs more effectively.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1-24"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2025.2457100","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Knowledge on Open Science Practices (OSP) has been promoted through responsible conduct of research training and the development of open science infrastructure to combat Irresponsible Research Behavior (IRB). Yet, there is limited evidence for the efficacy of OSP in minimizing IRB.

Methods: We asked N=778 participants to fill in questionnaires that contain OSP and ethical reasoning vignettes, and report self-admission rates of IRB and personality traits.

Results: We found that against our initial prediction, even though OSP was negatively correlated with IRB, this correlation was very weak, and upon controlling for individual differences factors, OSP neither predicted IRB nor was this relationship moderated by ethical reasoning. On the other hand, individual differences factors, namely dark personality triad, and conscientiousness and openness, contributed more to IRB than OSP knowledge.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that OSP knowledge needs to be complemented by the development of ethical virtues to encounter IRBs more effectively.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance MEDICAL ETHICS-

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

14.70%

发文量

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance is devoted to the examination and critical analysis of systems for maximizing integrity in the conduct of research. It provides an interdisciplinary, international forum for the development of ethics, procedures, standards policies, and concepts to encourage the ethical conduct of research and to enhance the validity of research results. The journal welcomes views on advancing the integrity of research in the fields of general and multidisciplinary sciences, medicine, law, economics, statistics, management studies, public policy, politics, sociology, history, psychology, philosophy, ethics, and information science. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees.