IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/p38nw.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Education and training policies for research integrity: Insights from a focus group study

Author

Listed:
  • Labib, Krishma
  • Evans, Natalie
  • Scepanovic, Rea
  • Kavouras, Panagiotis
  • Elizondo, Andrea Reyez
  • Kaltenbrunner, Wolfgang
  • Buljan, Ivan
  • Ravn, Tine
  • Widdershoven, Guy
  • Bouter, Lex

Abstract

Education is important for fostering research integrity (RI). Although RI training (a formal element of RI education) is increasingly provided, there is little knowledge on how research stakeholders view institutional RI education and training policies. Here, we present insights about research stakeholders’ views on what research institutions should take into account when developing and implementing RI education and training policies. We conducted 30 focus groups, engaging 147 participants in 8 European countries. Using a mixed deductive-inductive thematic analysis, we identified five themes: 1) RI education should be available to all; 2) education and training approaches and goals should be tailored; 3) motivating trainees is essential; 4) both formal and informal educational formats are necessary; and 5) institutions should take into account various individual, institutional, and system-of-science factors when implementing RI education. Our findings suggest that institutions should make RI education attractive for all, and tailor training to disciplinary-specific contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Labib, Krishma & Evans, Natalie & Scepanovic, Rea & Kavouras, Panagiotis & Elizondo, Andrea Reyez & Kaltenbrunner, Wolfgang & Buljan, Ivan & Ravn, Tine & Widdershoven, Guy & Bouter, Lex, 2021. "Education and training policies for research integrity: Insights from a focus group study," OSF Preprints p38nw, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:p38nw
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/p38nw
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/609e85e558d9d900e213ce6b/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/p38nw?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. Niels Mejlgaard & Lex M. Bouter & George Gaskell & Panagiotis Kavouras & Nick Allum & Anna-Kathrine Bendtsen & Costas A. Charitidis & Nik Claesen & Kris Dierickx & Anna Domaradzka & Andrea Reyes Elizo, 2020. "Research integrity: nine ways to move from talk to walk," Nature, Nature, vol. 586(7829), pages 358-360, October.
    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. Rosie Hastings & Krishma Labib & Iris Lechner & Lex Bouter & Guy Widdershoven & Natalie Evans, 2023. "Guidance on research integrity provided by pan-European discipline-specific learned societies: A scoping review," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(2), pages 318-335.
    2. Salaheddine Mnasri & Fadi Jaber, 2024. "How do cancer research scientists deal with machines and consumables? Exploring research ethics from an inductive ethnographic perspective," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-7, December.
    3. Gowri Gopalakrishna & Gerben ter Riet & Gerko Vink & Ineke Stoop & Jelte M Wicherts & Lex M Bouter, 2022. "Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-16, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:osf:osfxxx:p38nw. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.