Beyond “Compliance”: The Role of Institutional Culture in Promoting Research Integrity

Geller, Gail; Boyce, Alison; Ford, Daniel E.; Sugarman, Jeremy

doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3181e5f0e5

Cited by 44 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, even less is known about how to change institutional climate than how to provide optimal research ethics education (Geller et al, 2010). …”

Section: How Should Research Ethics Education Be Delivered?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Research Ethics Education for Community-Engaged Research: A Review and Research Agenda

Anderson

Solomon

Heitman

et al. 2012

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

106

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community engagement is increasingly becoming an integral part of research. “Community-engaged research” (CEnR) introduces new stakeholders as well as unique challenges to the protection of participants and the integrity of the research process. We—a group of representatives of CTSA-funded institutions and others who share expertise in research ethics and CEnR—have identified gaps in the literature regarding (1) ethical issues unique to CEnR; (2) the particular instructional needs of academic investigators, community research partners, and IRB members; and (3) best practices for teaching research ethics. This paper presents what we know, as well as what we still need to learn, in order to develop quality research ethics educational materials tailored to the full range of stakeholder groups in CEnR.

show abstract

“…However, even less is known about how to change institutional climate than how to provide optimal research ethics education (Geller et al, 2010). …”

Section: How Should Research Ethics Education Be Delivered?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Research Ethics Education for Community-Engaged Research: A Review and Research Agenda

Anderson

Solomon

Heitman

et al. 2012

Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

106

123

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other words, junior scientists are wary of negative repercussions if they bypass senior level scientists. The theme of hierarchy and its impact on conduct was also noted in a recent study of biomedical researchers (Geller, Boyce, Ford, et al 2010). Therefore, discussions of social concerns remain within a limited scientific context rather than moving to a platform focused on ethical frameworks and thinking.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

Barriers to Considering Ethical and Societal Implications of Research: Perceptions of Life Scientists

McCormick

Boyce

Ladd

et al. 2012

AJOB Primary Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background As part of an empirical study investigating how life scientists think about ethical and societal implications of their work, and about life science research in general, we sought to elucidate barriers that scientists might face in considering such implications. Method Between 2005 and 2007, we conducted a study consisting of phone interviews, focus groups, and a national survey of life scientists at biomedical research institutions. The study population included graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, faculty, clinical instructors, and research staff. We analyzed data through qualitative and quantitative methods. Results In analyzing the data, we found that life scientists do, in fact, face barriers to considering ethical and societal implications of research. We categorized these barriers as falling into four broad domains: (1) lack of awareness of ethical and societal implications; (2) lack of relevance of such concerns to their specific research; (3) self-confidence in their ability to resolve such concerns; and (4) aspects of the daily practice of science itself. Conclusions Life science researchers experience elements inherent in their training and in the conduct of science as barriers to thinking about ethical and societal implications related to their work. These findings suggest areas in which research ethics educators, bioethicists, and the scientific community can focus their efforts to improve social and ethical accountability in research.

show abstract

“…Compliance assumes minimum standards, not the achievement of excellence. Not only is responsible research "a very layered and complex set of behaviors and skills that go far beyond what we can hope to teach in one workshop or course" (Sieber 2013, p. 94), creating an ethical research culture often requires going well beyond compliance (Geller et al 2010) to a common understanding of the reasoning behind policy and regulation. US institutions' adoption of a compliance standard for education in research integrity risks conveying to trainees and senior researchers alike that responsible conduct is always straightforward and that "RCR" can be taught in 8 hours of face-to-face instruction.…”

Section: Federally Mandated Instruction On the Responsible Conduct Ofmentioning

confidence: 98%

Education in Research Integrity and Governance of Science in the United States, Argentina, and Brazil

Heitman

Litewka

Vasconcelos

2016

Handbook of Academic Integrity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Beyond “Compliance”: The Role of Institutional Culture in Promoting Research Integrity

Cited by 44 publications

References 23 publications

Research Ethics Education for Community-Engaged Research: A Review and Research Agenda

Research Ethics Education for Community-Engaged Research: A Review and Research Agenda

Barriers to Considering Ethical and Societal Implications of Research: Perceptions of Life Scientists

Education in Research Integrity and Governance of Science in the United States, Argentina, and Brazil

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About