首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Research Integrity and Research Ethics in Professional Codes of Ethics: Survey of Terminology Used by Professional Organizations across Research Disciplines
【2h】

Research Integrity and Research Ethics in Professional Codes of Ethics: Survey of Terminology Used by Professional Organizations across Research Disciplines

机译:专业道德守则中的研究完整性和研究道德:跨研究学科的专业组织使用的术语调查

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Professional codes of ethics are social contracts among members of a professional group, which aim to instigate, encourage and nurture ethical behaviour and prevent professional misconduct, including research and publication. Despite the existence of codes of ethics, research misconduct remains a serious problem. A survey of codes of ethics from 795 professional organizations from the Illinois Institute of Technology’s Codes of Ethics Collection showed that 182 of them (23%) used research integrity and research ethics terminology in their codes, with differences across disciplines: while the terminology was common in professional organizations in social sciences (82%), mental health (71%), sciences (61%), other organizations had no statements (construction trades, fraternal social organizations, real estate) or a few of them (management, media, engineering). A subsample of 158 professional organizations we judged to be directly involved in research significantly more often had statements on research integrity/ethics terminology than the whole sample: an average of 10.4% of organizations with a statement (95% CI = 10.4-23-5%) on any of the 27 research integrity/ethics terms compared to 3.3% (95% CI = 2.1–4.6%), respectively (P<0.001). Overall, 62% of all statements addressing research integrity/ethics concepts used prescriptive language in describing the standard of practice. Professional organizations should define research integrity and research ethics issues in their ethics codes and collaborate within and across disciplines to adequately address responsible conduct of research and meet contemporary needs of their communities.
机译:职业道德守则是专业团体成员之间的社会契约,旨在鼓励,鼓励和培育道德行为,并防止职业不当行为,包括研究和出版。尽管存在道德规范,但研究不端仍然是一个严重的问题。对来自伊利诺伊理工学院的道德规范集合的795个专业组织的道德规范的调查显示,其中有182个组织(占23%)在其规范中使用了研究完整性和研究道德术语,各学科之间存在差异:在社会科学专业组织(82%),心理健康(71%),科学(61%)中,其他组织没有陈述(建筑行业,兄弟社会组织,房地产)或其中一些陈述(管理,媒体,工程)。我们认为直接参与研究的158个专业组织的子样本中,关于研究完整性/道德术语的陈述要比整个样本中的陈述要多得多:平均有10.4%的组织有陈述(95%CI = 10.4-23-5) 27个研究诚信/道德条款中的任何一个,分别为3.3%(95%CI = 2.1–4.6%)(P <0.001)。总体而言,在所有涉及研究完整性/伦理概念的陈述中,有62%使用描述性语言来描述实践标准。专业组织应在其道德守则中定义研究完整性和研究道德问题,并在学科内和学科间开展合作,以充分解决负责任的研究行为并满足其社区的当代需求。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号