IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v166y2016icp150-159.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Morals, morale and motivations in data fabrication: Medical research fieldworkers views and practices in two Sub-Saharan African contexts

Author

Listed:
  • Kingori, Patricia
  • Gerrets, René

Abstract

Data fabrication, incorrect collection strategies and poor data management, are considered detrimental to high-quality scientific research. While poor data management have been occasionally excused, fabrication constitutes a cardinal sin – scientific misconduct. Scholarly examinations of fabrication usually seek to expose and capture its prevalence and, less frequently, its consequences and causes. Most accounts centre on high-income countries, individual senior researchers and scientists who are portrayed as irrational, immoral or deceptive.

Suggested Citation

  • Kingori, Patricia & Gerrets, René, 2016. "Morals, morale and motivations in data fabrication: Medical research fieldworkers views and practices in two Sub-Saharan African contexts," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 150-159.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:166:y:2016:i:c:p:150-159
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.08.019
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953616304415
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.08.019?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joseph Ana & Tracey Koehlmoos & Richard Smith & Lijing L Yan, 2013. "Research Misconduct in Low- and Middle-Income Countries," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-6, March.
    2. Timmermans, Stefan & McKay, Tara, 2009. "Clinical trials as treatment option: Bioethics and health care disparities in substance dependency," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 1784-1790, December.
    3. Finn, Arden & Ranchhod, Vimal, 2013. "Genuine Fakes: The prevalence and implications of fieldworker fraud in a large South African survey," SALDRU Working Papers 115, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University of Cape Town.
    4. Daniele Fanelli, 2009. "How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(5), pages 1-11, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hutchinson, Eleanor & Nayiga, Susan & Nabirye, Christine & Taaka, Lilian & Staedke, Sarah G., 2018. "Data value and care value in the practice of health systems: A case study in Uganda," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 123-130.
    2. Closser, Svea & Mendenhall, Emily & Brown, Peter & Neill, Rachel & Justice, Judith, 2022. "The anthropology of health systems: A history and review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 300(C).
    3. Melberg, Andrea & Diallo, Abdoulaye Hama & Storeng, Katerini T. & Tylleskär, Thorkild & Moland, Karen Marie, 2018. "Policy, paperwork and ‘postographs’: Global indicators and maternity care documentation in rural Burkina Faso," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 215(C), pages 28-35.
    4. Wei-Chih Lu & I-Ching Tsai & Kuan-Chung Wang & Te-Ai Tang & Kuan-Chen Li & Ya-Ci Ke & Peng-Ting Chen, 2021. "Innovation Resistance and Resource Allocation Strategy of Medical Information Digitalization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-20, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniele Fanelli & Rodrigo Costas & Vincent Larivière, 2015. "Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-18, June.
    2. Tom Van der Stocken & Jean Hugé & Evelien Deboelpaep & Maarten P. M. Vanhove & Luc Janssens de Bisthoven & Nico Koedam, 2016. "Academic capacity building: holding up a mirror," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(3), pages 1277-1280, March.
    3. Vanja Pupovac, 2021. "The frequency of plagiarism identified by text-matching software in scientific articles: a systematic review and meta-analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 8981-9003, November.
    4. Moustafa, Khaled, 2018. "Don't fall in common science pitfall!," FrenXiv ycjha, Center for Open Science.
    5. Love, Peter E.D. & Ika, Lavagnon A. & Ahiaga-Dagbui, Dominic D., 2019. "On de-bunking ‘fake news’ in a post truth era: Why does the Planning Fallacy explanation for cost overruns fall short?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 397-408.
    6. Jeremy Hall & Ben R. Martin, 2019. "Towards a Taxonomy of Academic Misconduct: The Case of Business School Research," SPRU Working Paper Series 2019-02, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    7. Kartal, Melis & Tremewan, James, 2018. "An offer you can refuse: The effect of transparency with endogenous conflict of interest," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 44-55.
    8. Robert J Warren II & Joshua R King & Charlene Tarsa & Brian Haas & Jeremy Henderson, 2017. "A systematic review of context bias in invasion biology," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-12, August.
    9. Jasper Brinkerink, 2023. "When Shooting for the Stars Becomes Aiming for Asterisks: P-Hacking in Family Business Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 47(2), pages 304-343, March.
    10. Frederique Bordignon, 2020. "Self-correction of science: a comparative study of negative citations and post-publication peer review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1225-1239, August.
    11. Hensel, Przemysław G., 2019. "Supporting replication research in management journals: Qualitative analysis of editorials published between 1970 and 2015," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 45-57.
    12. Bergemann, Dirk & Ottaviani, Marco, 2021. "Information Markets and Nonmarkets," CEPR Discussion Papers 16459, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    13. Gary Charness & David Masclet & Marie Claire Villeval, 2014. "The Dark Side of Competition for Status," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(1), pages 38-55, January.
    14. Brian Fabo & Martina Jancokova & Elisabeth Kempf & Lubos Pastor, 2020. "Fifty Shades of QE: Conflicts of Interest in Economic Research," Working Papers 2020-128, Becker Friedman Institute for Research In Economics.
    15. Bruce B. Svare, 2020. "A Cautionary Tale for Psychology and Higher Education in Asia: Following Western Practices of Incentivising Scholarship May Have Negative Outcomes," Psychology and Developing Societies, , vol. 32(1), pages 94-121, March.
    16. Harrison, Mark, 2009. "Forging Success : Soviet Managers and False Accounting, 1943 to 1962," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 909, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    17. Stephan B Bruns & John P A Ioannidis, 2016. "p-Curve and p-Hacking in Observational Research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(2), pages 1-13, February.
    18. Harrison, Mark, 2011. "Forging success: Soviet managers and accounting fraud, 1943-1962," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 43-64, March.
    19. Necker, Sarah, 2014. "Scientific misbehavior in economics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 1747-1759.
    20. Gilles Grolleau & Naoufel Mzoughi, 2022. "How research institutions can make the best of scandals – once they become unavoidable," Post-Print hal-03908837, HAL.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:166:y:2016:i:c:p:150-159. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.