A phenomenographic study of scientists’ beliefs about the causes of scientists’ research misconduct

Abstract

When scientists act unethically, their actions can cause harm to participants, undermine knowledge creation, and discredit the scientific community. Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) training is one of the main ways institutions try to prevent scientists from acting unethically. However, this only addresses the problem if scientists value the training, and if the problem stems from ignorance. This study looks at what scientists think causes unethical behavior in science, with the hopes of improving RCR training by shaping it based on the views of the targeted audience ( n = 14 scientists). Previous studies have surveyed scientists about what they believe causes unethical behavior using pre-defined response items. This study uses a qualitative research methodology to elicit scientists’ beliefs without predefining the range of responses. The data for this phenomenographic study were collected from interviews which presented ethical case studies and asked subjects how they would respond to those situations. Categories and subcategories were created to organize their reasonings. This work will inform the development of future methods for preventing unethical behavior in research.

“Navigating and Applying Epistemic Integrity” as a Missing Science Practice: Re-envisioning Ethics for Both Undergraduate Chemistry Students and Instructors

“…28,29 Interviews with scientists showed agreement that improving the extant model of RCR education will only go so far in eliminating scientific misconduct. 30 These findings exemplify that the solution to ethical violations neither involves increasing nor improving training protocols, demonstrating the complexities of ethics as they pertain to enacted science practices.…”

“…NSF Fellows were surveyed and over half had reported resources like CITI modules, university courses, and workshops having no influence . Other studies have similarly identified current RCR resources being ineffective and may even undermine ethical reasoning. , Interviews with scientists showed agreement that improving the extant model of RCR education will only go so far in eliminating scientific misconduct . These findings exemplify that the solution to ethical violations neither involves increasing nor improving training protocols, demonstrating the complexities of ethics as they pertain to enacted science practices.…”

‘I should do what?’ Addressing research misconduct through values alignment

“…While we can't say for sure that there is a correlation between normative confusion and RM, there is evidence that deficiencies in understanding contribute to RM. For instance, in their qualitative interview study with scientists, Cairns et al (2021), half of the participants referenced a lack of understanding of ethics as being a cause of unethical behaviour.…”

Motivated Reasoning and Research Ethics Guidelines

“…Perhaps paradoxically, research misconduct can sometimes be explained by a desire to protect careers, livelihoods, and personal relationships'. 35 As the authors note, researchers are not wrong in this belief: pressure to publish and competitive research environments are correlated with increased misconduct.…”