Integrity in the Global Research Arena

Steneck, Nicholas H.; Anderson, Melissa S.; Kleinert, Sabine; Mayer, Tony

doi:10.1142/9369

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Privacy is protected under law by the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Data Protection Directive (95/46/EC). These are both reflected in the UK law in the Data Protection Act 1998 (Steneck, Anderson et al 2012). This act of parliament states a list of legal obligations held by those who handle personal information.…”

Section: "Integrity: Researchers Should Take Responsibility For the Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although this research received no direct public funding, a proportion of the income of the host institution derives from public funds. Steneck, Anderson et al (2012) propose that public funds are provided with the expectation that the subsequent research will educate and benefit the public providing the funds. The present research fulfils this responsibility by revealing new insights into the educational process and contributes to the wider body of knowledge that helps educators design more effective learning environments.…”

Section: "Research Records: Researchers Should Keep Clear Accurate Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Feedback in technology‐based instruction: Learner preferences

Lefèvre¹,

Cox²

2014

Brit J Educational Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research investigates learner preferences for the format of feedback when using technology‐based instruction (TBI). The primary method of data collection was to provide subjects with a range of options for TBI feedback following responses to multiple‐choice questions and then observe their choices. A software tool both presented the feedback options and tracked subsequent interactions. Over a 3‐year period, data were collected relating to 2066 postgraduate students studying one or more of three items of TBI. These students responded to a total of 61 929 questions. In addition, a series of semi‐structured interviews were conducted which investigated why subjects made their choices and the factors that affect these choices. Recommendations to educators regarding the content, timing and delivery of TBI feedback are suggested.

show abstract

Section: "Integrity: Researchers Should Take Responsibility For the Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: "Research Records: Researchers Should Keep Clear Accurate Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feedback in technology‐based instruction: Learner preferences

Lefèvre¹,

Cox²

2014

Brit J Educational Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Addressing differences in ethical standards is clearly an important part of scientific cooperation programmes [2]. It is an issue of increasing concern in the Organization for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD) countries; in 2007, the OECD set up a committee to formulate practical guidelines for dealing with misconduct allegations in international collaborative projects [22].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, cultural differences lead to different interpretations of what constitutes responsible conduct of research (RCR) in many areas, from the conduct of research itself to animal welfare, biosecurity or the involvement of human subjects. These differences and their impact on research are particularly relevant for collaborations between established and emerging scientific powers and for changes in science policy within and among different countries [2].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The new geography of scientific collaborations

Vasconcelos

Steneck²,

Anderson

et al. 2012

EMBO Reports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Appendix B: RESOURCES AND REFERENCES FOR SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY, ETHICS, AND GEOETHICS

2017

Scientific Integrity and Ethics in the Geosciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The chapters in this book can serve as valuable tools for students, faculty, instructors, and scientists, for understanding, teaching, and implementing the principles of scientific integrity and geoethics. It is also useful for professionals in industry and government, public policy, and decision makers who seek to understand the latest advances in scientific integrity and geoethics. Below is a list of selected resources and references for those who wish to delve deeper. Most of these resources and references were released in the last decade. The content focuses on scientific integrity and geoethics, and the list is divided into three kinds of resources: books and reports, journal articles, and websites. References were selected to include recent national and international codes of conduct, statements and codes of conduct from professional groups, and recent studies and reports on scientific integrity, geoethics, and misconduct.

show abstract

Integrity in the Global Research Arena

Cited by 8 publications

References 0 publications

Feedback in technology‐based instruction: Learner preferences

Feedback in technology‐based instruction: Learner preferences

The new geography of scientific collaborations

Appendix B: RESOURCES AND REFERENCES FOR SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY, ETHICS, AND GEOETHICS

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About