IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04276024.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Crossing the Red Line? Empirical Evidence and Useful Recommendations on Questionable Research Practices among Business Scholars

Author

Listed:
  • H. Latan
  • C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour
  • Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour

    (Métis Lab EM Normandie - EM Normandie - École de Management de Normandie)

  • M. Ali

Abstract

Academic leaders in management from all over the world\textemdash including recent calls by the Academy of Management Shaw (Academy of Management Journal 60(3): 819\textendash 822, 2017)\textemdash have urged further research into the extent and use of questionable research practices~(QRPs). In order to provide empirical evidence on the topic of QRPs, this work presents two linked studies. Study 1 determines the level of use of QRPs based on self-admission rates and estimated prevalence among business scholars in Indonesia. It was determined that if the level of QRP use identified in Study 1 was quite high, Study 2 would be conducted to follow-up on this result, and this was indeed the case. Study 2 examines the factors that encourage and discourage the use of QRPs in the sample analyzed. The main research findings are as follows: (a) in Study 1, we found the self-admission rates and estimated prevalence of business scholars' involvement in QRPs to be quite high when compared with studies conducted in other countries and (b) in Study 2, we found pressure for publication from universities, fear of rejection of manuscripts, meeting the expectations of reviewers, and available rewards to be the main reasons for the use of QRPs in Indonesia, whereas (c) formal sanctions and prevention efforts are factors that discourage QRPs. Recommendations for stakeholders (in this case, reviewers, editors, funders, supervisors, chancellors and others) are also provided in order to reduce the use of QRPs. \textcopyright 2021, The Author(s).

Suggested Citation

  • H. Latan & C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour & Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour & M. Ali, 2023. "Crossing the Red Line? Empirical Evidence and Useful Recommendations on Questionable Research Practices among Business Scholars," Post-Print hal-04276024, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04276024
    DOI: 10.1007/s10551-021-04961-7
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://normandie-univ.hal.science/hal-04276024
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://normandie-univ.hal.science/hal-04276024/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10551-021-04961-7?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert Bloomfield & Kristina Rennekamp & Blake Steenhoven, 2018. "No System Is Perfect: Understanding How Registration‐Based Editorial Processes Affect Reproducibility and Investment in Research Quality," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 313-362, May.
    2. Daniele Fanelli, 2010. "“Positive” Results Increase Down the Hierarchy of the Sciences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(4), pages 1-10, April.
    3. Wennberg, Karl & Anderson, Brian S. & McMullen, Jeffrey, 2019. "2 Editorial: Enhancing Quantitative Theory-Testing Entrepreneurship Research," Ratio Working Papers 323, The Ratio Institute.
    4. Campbell R. Harvey, 2017. "Presidential Address: The Scientific Outlook in Financial Economics," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 72(4), pages 1399-1440, August.
    5. Leung, Kwok, 2011. "Presenting Post Hoc Hypotheses as A Priori: Ethical and Theoretical Issues," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 471-479, November.
    6. Anderson, Brian S. & Wennberg, Karl & McMullen, Jeffery S., 2019. "Editorial: Enhancing quantitative theory-testing entrepreneurship research," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 1-1.
    7. Vít Macháček & Martin Srholec, 2021. "RETRACTED ARTICLE: Predatory publishing in Scopus: evidence on cross-country differences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 1897-1921, March.
    8. Kristin Behfar & Gerardo A. Okhuysen, 2018. "Perspective—Discovery Within Validation Logic: Deliberately Surfacing, Complementing, and Substituting Abductive Reasoning in Hypothetico-Deductive Inquiry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 323-340, April.
    9. Necker, Sarah, 2014. "Scientific misbehavior in economics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 1747-1759.
    10. Linder, Christian & Farahbakhsh, Siavash, 2020. "Unfolding the Black Box of Questionable Research Practices: Where Is the Line Between Acceptable and Unacceptable Practices?," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(3), pages 335-360, July.
    11. Mark S. Schwartz, 2016. "Ethical Decision-Making Theory: An Integrated Approach," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 139(4), pages 755-776, December.
    12. Hengky Latan & Christian M. Ringle & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour, 2018. "Whistleblowing Intentions Among Public Accountants in Indonesia: Testing for the Moderation Effects," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 152(2), pages 573-588, October.
    13. Anand Krishna & Sebastian M Peter, 2018. "Questionable research practices in student final theses – Prevalence, attitudes, and the role of the supervisor’s perceived attitudes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(8), pages 1-24, August.
    14. Cox, Adam & Craig, Russell & Tourish, Dennis, 2018. "Retraction statements and research malpractice in economics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 924-935.
    15. R Grant Steen & Arturo Casadevall & Ferric C Fang, 2013. "Why Has the Number of Scientific Retractions Increased?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(7), pages 1-9, July.
    16. Benson Honig & Joseph Lampel & Donald Siegel & Paul Drnevich, 2014. "Ethics in the Production and Dissemination of Management Research: Institutional Failure or Individual Fallibility?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 118-142, January.
    17. Hengky Latan & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, 2021. "To Blow or Not to Blow the Whistle: The Role of Rationalization in the Perceived Seriousness of Threats and Wrongdoing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 517-535, March.
    18. Klaas Sijtsma, 2016. "Playing with Data—Or How to Discourage Questionable Research Practices and Stimulate Researchers to Do Things Right," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 81(1), pages 1-15, March.
    19. Daniel Wigboldus & Ron Dotsch, 2016. "Encourage Playing with Data and Discourage Questionable Reporting Practices," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 81(1), pages 27-32, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hengky Latan & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour & Murad Ali, 2023. "Crossing the Red Line? Empirical Evidence and Useful Recommendations on Questionable Research Practices among Business Scholars," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(3), pages 549-569, May.
    2. 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.
    3. Christopher J. Boudreaux & Daniel L. Bennett & David S. Lucas & Boris N. Nikolaev, 2023. "Taking mental models seriously: institutions, entrepreneurship, and the mediating role of socio-cognitive traits," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 465-493, August.
    4. Krukowski, Kipp A. & Pollack, Jeffrey M. & Rutherford, Matthew W., 2023. "Winning the opportunity to pitch: Piquing startup investors’ interest by sending the right signals in executive summaries," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 75-86.
    5. Romi Kher & Shu Yang & Scott L. Newbert, 2023. "Accelerating emergence: the causal (but contextual) effect of social impact accelerators on nascent for-profit social ventures," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 389-413, June.
    6. 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.
    7. Tracy, Elizabeth M. & Billingsley, Joseph & Pollack, Jeffrey M. & Barber, Dennis & Beorchia, Ace & Carr, Jon C. & Gonzalez, Gabe & Harris, Michael L. & Michaelis, Timothy L. & Morrow, Grayson & Philli, 2021. "A behavioral insights approach to recruiting entrepreneurs for an academic study during the COVID-19 pandemic," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 16(C).
    8. Rasim Serdar Kurdoglu & Nüfer Yasin Ateş, 2022. "Arguing to Defeat: Eristic Argumentation and Irrationality in Resolving Moral Concerns," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 175(3), pages 519-535, January.
    9. Hengky Latan & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour, 2021. "To Blow or Not to Blow the Whistle: The Role of Rationalization in the Perceived Seriousness of Threats and Wrongdoing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 169(3), pages 517-535, March.
    10. Anne Antoni & Haley Beer, 2024. "Ethical Sensibilities for Practicing Care in Management and Organization Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 190(2), pages 279-294, March.
    11. Liu, Yu & Maula, Markku, 2021. "Contextual status effects: The performance effects of host-country network status and regulatory institutions in cross-border venture capital," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(5).
    12. Thibaut Arpinon & Romain Espinosa, 2023. "A practical guide to Registered Reports for economists," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(1), pages 90-122, June.
    13. G. Christopher Crawford & Vitaliy Skorodziyevskiy & Casey J. Frid & Thomas E. Nelson & Zahra Booyavi & Diana M. Hechavarria & Xuanye Li & Paul D. Reynolds & Ehsan Teymourian, 2022. "Advancing Entrepreneurship Theory Through Replication: A Case Study on Contemporary Methodological Challenges, Future Best Practices, and an Entreaty for Communality," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 46(3), pages 779-799, May.
    14. Cheng, Zhiming & Smyth, Russell, 2021. "Education and migrant entrepreneurship in urban China," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 506-529.
    15. Lorenz Graf-Vlachy, 2022. "Is the readability of abstracts decreasing in management research?," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 1063-1084, May.
    16. Chen, Jean Jinghan & Cui, Chuantao & Hunt, Richard A. & Li, Leona Shao-Zhi, 2020. "External enablement of new venture creation: An exploratory, query-driven assessment of China's high-speed rail expansion," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 35(6).
    17. Lundmark, Erik & Milanov, Hana & Seigner, Benedikt David Christian, 2022. "Can it be measured? A quantitative assessment of critiques of the entrepreneurship literature," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 17(C).
    18. Markku Maula & Wouter Stam, 2020. "Enhancing Rigor in Quantitative Entrepreneurship Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 44(6), pages 1059-1090, November.
    19. Berggren, Christian & Karabag, Solmaz Filiz, 2019. "Scientific misconduct at an elite medical institute: The role of competing institutional logics and fragmented control," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 428-443.
    20. Thibaut Arpinon & Romain Espinosa, 2023. "A Practical Guide to Registered Reports for Economists," Post-Print halshs-03897719, 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:hal:journl:hal-04276024. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.