Fostering Integrity in Research (2017) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
6 Understanding the Causes
6 Understanding the Causes
Pages 91-104
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 91... ...
Why people engage in criminal or other pathological behavior and the conditions that encourage or discourage such behavior are issues of perennial interest in the behavioral and social sciences. Recent work provides some useful insights on these questions that are relevant to understanding why and under what conditions researchers commit misconduct and engage in detrimental research practices.
|
From page 92... ...
Interventions directed at individual researchers that go beyond the investigation of alleged misconduct, such as better education and training or closer supervision, might be combined with efforts to improve research environments or even address structural issues. When Responsible Science was released, the potential but as yet undocumented and little-understood importance of environmental factors in affecting integrity in science was acknowledged in the statement that "factors in the modern research environment contribute to misconduct in science" (NAS-NAE-IOM, 1992)
|
From page 93... ...
may perpetuate suboptimal responses on the part of the community, causing the negative consequences and damage resulting from misconduct that are described in Chapter 5 to be greater than they need to be. INSIGHTS FROM THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES ABOUT RESEARCH MISCONDUCT AND DETRIMENTAL RESEARCH PRACTICES Decades of research in the social and behavioral sciences have generated important insights on why humans deviate from the behavioral norms of the groups to which they belong.
|
From page 94... ...
The simple desire for personal gain seems a natural explanation for the behaviors of self-interested individuals, not sufficiently held in check whether by self-control or threat of punishment. In fact, greed intuitively fits the "bad actor" individual defect explanation of deviant behavior, since moral defect may allow for the unhealthy expression of self-interest as greed.
|
From page 95... ...
tends to be a much stronger motivator of behavior than does the potential for gain, and on the other hand that individuals tend toward risk aversion when confronted with potential gains but bias toward risk seeking when confronted with avoiding potential losses. Applied to a research setting, this theory would imply that, other things being equal, researchers facing a potential loss of position or resources would be more inclined to take risks -- including research misconduct or DRPs -- than those seeking to gain status or resources.1 Experimental work in the social and behavioral sciences has shed light on how these theoretical perspectives can be applied to specific problems such as cheating by students that could carry implications for research practices.
|
From page 96... ...
Some preliminary, limited research has attempted to bring some of this theoretical richness to bear directly on the questions of research misconduct and detrimental research practices, but the existing research has not been well positioned to provide compelling tests of the hypotheses suggested by these perspectives (Antes et al., 2007; DuBois et al., 2016; Martinson et al., 2006, 2010; Medeiros et al., 2014; Mumford et al., 2007, 2008)
|
From page 97... ...
. In contrast to a narrow focus on misconduct, Nylenna and Simonsen have offered an epidemiologic perspective that draws attention to the entire distribution of behavior composed of research misconduct and detrimental research practices (Nylenna and Simonsen, 2006)
|
From page 98... ...
CURRENT FUNDING AND ORGANIZATIONAL TRENDS AND THEIR NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON RESEARCH ENVIRONMENTS Research environments at institutions and laboratories that produce outstanding work have long been characterized by significant competitiveness and pressure to perform. However, patterns of funding and organization that have emerged over the past few decades in the United States have created environments increasingly characterized by elements identified above that are associated with cheating, such as very high stakes, a very low expectation of success, and peer cultures that accept corner cutting.
|
From page 99... ...
. Thus, the number of basic biomedical PhDs began to increase substantially in 2004, just as the doubling of the NIH budget was ending, which reflects the 5- to 7-year graduate student cycle.
|
From page 100... ...
. Even for the minority of researchers in biomedical fields who are eventually able to secure tenure-track faculty positions, the research environment continues to be characterized by hypercompetition.
|
From page 101... ...
They also mask differences between institutions. For example, 2013 Association of American Medical Colleges data from 72 academic medical centers showed that while most institutions fell in a range where 40 to 60 percent of non-MD faculty salaries were covered by sponsored programs, a minority of institutions (fewer than 10)
|
From page 102... ...
There's patents at stake. There is getting yourself funded." One of the negative consequences of competition cited by scientists is an inducement to engage in careless or detrimental research practices.
|
From page 103... ...
While developing approaches to remedy these structural challenges is beyond the scope of this report, the linkages between structural features of the research enterprise such as funding mechanisms, research environments, incentives, and behavior need to be better understood. THE VALUE AND IMPORTANCE OF RESEARCH ON RESEARCH INTEGRITY The discussion in this chapter illustrates that the causes of research misconduct and detrimental research practices are complex.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.