Journal of Academic Ethics最新文献

Traditional conceptions of academic authorship, e.g., the seemingly self-evident assumption that an author is someone who actually writes a text, is challenged by the complexity, scale, and collaborative nature of scientific research. Authors are expected to make a substantial contribution and to assume accountability for all aspects of the work, but in practice, many individuals listed as authors fail to meet all these criteria, notably in biomedical fields. In view of this tension between norm and practice, new conceptions of authorship have emerged, reflecting the growing importance of team science. This paper assesses whether consortium authorship as an emerging practice (also known as 'group authorship' or 'team authorship') offers a viable approach. Besides practical benefits, there is a normative dimension behind this concept, as it aims to acknowledge the importance of collaboration (seeing it as more than the sum of contributions attributable to individuals), but it also raises ethical questions concerning the responsibilities of consortium authors for the text as a whole. We opt for a case study approach, zooming in on experiences within a research consortium. Besides a literature review, we analyse the results of a deliberative workshop on consortium authorship and analyse how consortium authorship is currently handled in academic journals, notably in the biomedical field. We argue that consortium authorship works best when used in combination with individual authorship, but also notice that it challenges us to rethink the concept of academic authorship as such, for which we use Donna Haraway's concept of sympoiesis as a starting point.

The academic field of exercise science has experienced exponential growth in the past four decades, including in the number of degrees awarded, available job opportunities for graduates, amount of research conducted, and external funding for research. Typically, exercise science students are young, healthy adults, with an inherent interest in exercise science, making them "ideal" research participants for faculty-led research studies. However, these characteristics also make exercise science students particularly vulnerable to coercion and undue influence by faculty researchers aiming to use these students as research participants. Here, we will discuss ethical concerns related to recruiting exercise science students as research participants in faculty-led research related to power differentials, recruitment of female participants, and academic credit. We will provide recommendations to protect potential student participants from coercion, unjustifiable pressure, and undue influence that could undermine their voluntary informed consent.

While previous work has highlighted the possible impacts of undertaking emotionally challenging research, it is only recently, particularly within the UK with the 2028 Research Excellence Framework focus on research culture, that this subject is starting to gain senior leadership attention. Funded by the UK Research and Innovation, Researcher England, Enhancing Research Culture fund. We undertook an in-depth study involving researchers across topics and disciplines in the humanities and social science, with the objectives of establishing: the impacts of studying emotionally challenging topics on researchers, what they currently found helpful in preventing and/or coping with these impacts, and what additional support they wanted. In this paper we report on findings related to the latter two objectives to provide insight into how future research projects could be ethically designed to minimize distress, secondary and vicarious trauma in researchers. We then use these findings to formulate an innovative strategic institutional response to researcher wellbeing and emotionally challenging studies that can be implemented in three stages: Bronze, which is focused on awareness raising and the development of policies and guidance that are built into ethical procedures; Silver, involving the establishment of training, clear referral pathways, and (funded) Researcher Wellbeing Plans - including regular academic supervision, team working, and extra time in workloads to undertake wellbeing interventions - built into the design of projects; and Gold, a wholistic institutional response where, in addition to the above, policies, processes, practices and culture are proactively attentive to the prevention of and provision for distress relating to emotionally challenging research.

This research investigates whether academic integrity can be strengthened through a holistic educative approach that combines compulsory modules on academic integrity, pedagogy that challenges punitive approaches, and an embedded curriculum. We present quantitative and qualitative data from surveys and interview responses from students to investigate their experiences and perceptions of our approach. Qualitative data suggest students appreciate the educative approach and that it fosters agency in students. Most participants – even those who indicated they had been part of an academic integrity breach process and students who knew someone who had been involved in the process – expressed that the process itself led to a greater understanding of academic integrity generally and students felt they could address the issue for themselves and benefit into the future. Responses indicated students wanted to have a voice in the academic integrity process. This research indicates that a holistic educative approach promotes students’ agency in relation to their academic work and frames academic integrity as a positive and desirable aspect of students’ developing academic identities.

Higher education academic integrity policies are varied, and similarly, the language regarding the act of fabricating citations can be diverse and subjective. With recent calls to align academic integrity policies with practice, the aim of this paper is to gain a better understanding of how the act of fabricating citations is presented in higher education academic integrity policies by conducting a two-phase content analysis of the web-based, academic conduct policies for undergraduate students at public institutions of higher education in the State of New Jersey. The first phase consisted of a conceptual analysis for language regarding the act of fabricating citations. The second phase consisted of a thematic analysis of the policies that included language regarding the fabrication of citations. This study finds several potential issues. Policies that lack language regarding the fabrication of citations fail to communicate it as a prohibited act, and some policies that include language regarding the fabrication of citations use ambiguous terminology that is subjective, exclusive examples that fail to include all acts of citation fabrication, or phrasing that fails to align with the following commonly used writing styles: American Psychological Association (APA), Chicago Manual of Style (CMOS), and Modern Language Association (MLA).

The exposure of scientific scandals and the increase of dubious research practices have generated a stream of studies on Questionable Research Practices (QRPs), such as failure to acknowledge co-authors, selective presentation of findings, or removal of data not supporting desired outcomes. In contrast to high-profile fraud cases, QRPs can be investigated using quantitative, survey-based methods. However, several design issues remain to be solved. This paper starts with a review of four problems in the QRP research: the problem of precision and prevalence, the problem of social desirability bias, the problem of incomplete coverage, and the problem of controversiality, sensitivity and missing responses. Various ways to handle these problems are discussed based on a case study of the design of a large, cross-field QRP survey in the social and medical sciences in Sweden. The paper describes the key steps in the design process, including technical and cognitive testing and repeated test versions to arrive at reliable survey items on the prevalence of QRPs and hypothesized associated factors in the organizational and normative environments. Partial solutions to the four problems are assessed, unresolved issues are discussed, and tradeoffs that resist simple solutions are articulated. The paper ends with a call for systematic comparisons of survey designs and item quality to build a much-needed cumulative knowledge trajectory in the field of integrity studies.

Concerns over students engaging in various forms of academic misconduct persist, especially with the post-COVID19 rise in online learning and assessment. Research has demonstrated a clear role of the personality trait psychopathy in cheating, yet little is known about why this relationship exists. Building on the research by Curtis et al. (Personality and Individual Differences, 185, 111277, 2022a), this study tested an extended Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) model, including psychopathy as a precursor to attitudes and subjective norms, and measures of anticipated moral emotions (shame and guilt), to predict cheating intentions and cheating behaviours. A cross-sectional survey was administered online to university students from around the globe (n = 257). Results from a serial mediation analysis revealed that psychopathy predicted academic misconduct behaviours indirectly through attitudes, subjective norms, anticipated guilt (but not anticipated shame), and intentions. These findings indicate that cheating may be reduced by modifying attitudes to cheating, subjective norms regarding cheating, and anticipated feelings of guilt related to engaging in academic misconduct. In addition, the results revealed high rates of several forms of cheating, particularly in unsupervised online tests, which have been used more widely since the COVID-19 pandemic. This finding raises concerns regarding the poor security of such assessments.

For decades, student ratings of university faculty have been used by administrators in high stakes faculty employment decisions such as tenure, promotion, contract renewal and reappointment, and merit pay. However, virtually no attention has been paid to the ethical questions of using ratings in employment decisions. Instead, the ratings literature is generally limited to psychometric issues such as whether a given student ratings instrument exhibits the statistical properties of reliability and validity. There is no consensus understanding of teaching effectiveness, the very attribute that students are alleged to “evaluate.” What students are actually doing when they complete a ratings form—whether measuring, evaluating, reporting, judging, opining, etc.—remains unsettled in the ratings literature. If ratings are surveys of student satisfaction, they have no logical or ethical connection with teaching expertise. I argue that the administrative use of student ratings in faculty employment decisions violates basic moral principles including nonmaleficence, beneficence, professional autonomy and clinical independence, and multiple aspects of justice including due care, truthfulness, and equitable treatment. These ethical violations rule against any administrative use of student ratings in faculty employment decisions, including the “use with caution in conjunction with other evaluative methods” deployment of student ratings. My conclusion is that such use should be immediately and universally terminated. Formative use of student questionnaires as part of ordinary instructional communication and feedback between instructor and students is a separate issue and outside of the scope of this paper.

To determine the effectiveness of current ethical teaching and to suggest ways to reform the current ethical curriculum in light of students’ perspectives and experiences. Students of Dow Medical College were selected for this cross-sectional study conducted between the year 2020 till 2023. The sample size was 387, calculated by OpenEpi. A questionnaire consisting of 17 close-ended questions was used to collect data from participants selected via stratified random sampling. The questionnaire consisted of two parts. The first part included the demographics. While the second contained 15 questions designed to assess the participants’ current teaching of ethics and effective ways to further improve it. The data obtained were analyzed using IBM SPSS statistics 26. Out of the 376 students who gave consent, the majority of the respondents (64.6%) encountered situations where they felt that their current teaching of ethics was insufficient and (54%) believed that the current teaching of ethics could be improved and made further effective. Practical sessions, PBLs (problem-based learning), case analysis, and ward visits were some of the ways the participants believed could help improve the teaching of medical ethics. Most students (92.8%) agreed that external factors like burnout and excessive workload have an impact on medical professionals’ ethical practices. In light of our study, a refined curriculum with a focus on ethical teaching must be established, with input from students to ensure that the medical students have the necessary expertise to manage an ethical dilemma.