首页> 外文期刊>Research Ethics >Research integrity: emphasising our commitment
【24h】

Research integrity: emphasising our commitment

机译:研究诚信:强调我们的承诺

获取原文
       

摘要

It is just over a year since the editors of this journal announced a broadening of the remit for submission. In doing so they made an explicit commitment to supporting work that examines research integrity issues. Furthering this commitment, we announce that Dr Edward Dove has joined Research Ethics as Associate Editor, with a focus on overseeing manuscripts that concern research integrity and/or misconduct matters. As detailed in the previous editorial, research integrity is a counterpart to research ethics. Where research ethics focuses more on research governance at the programme or study level, research integrity takes as its focus the researcher themselves, emphasising the values and virtues of those conducting research. The Canadian Council of Academies research integrity framework, for example, articulates values of honesty, fairness, trust, accountability and openness as being key to research integrity (Davenport et al., 2010). A concrete example of efforts to improve research integrity is seen through the push for Open Science and research reporting guidelines (Glasziou et al., 2014; Nicholls et al., 2016). The use of reporting guidelines to facilitate more transparent and complete publication practices promotes what Masic (2012) calls ‘intellectual honesty’; being straightforward in description of the research process. When reporting guidelines are combined with what O’Neill (2002) has described as the ‘audit agenda’ and the ‘openness agenda’, the completeness and transparency of reporting can be assessed through peer review more easily. This, in turn, promotes trust in research findings and reporting, and ultimately the research process.
机译:自本期刊的编辑宣布扩大续签以来,这只是一年以来。这样做,他们就是明确承诺支持检查研究完整性问题的工作。进一步承诺,我们宣布,爱德华博士德沃德将研究道德作为助理编辑加入,重点是监督涉及研究完整性和/或不当行为的稿件。如上一年的编辑所详述,研究完整性是研究道德的对应物。研究道德在计划或学习水平上重点关注研究治理,研究诚信随着研究员本身的重点,强调了这些开展研究的价值观和优点。例如,加拿大院校理事会研究诚信框架,例如,阐明了诚实,公平,信任,问责制和开放的价值,是研究完整性的关键(Davenport等,2010)。通过推动开放的科学和研究报告指南,可以看到提高研究完整性的具体例子(Glasziou等,2014; Nicholls等,2016)。使用报告准则以促进更透明和完整的出版物实践促进了MASIC(2012)呼叫“智力诚实”;在研究过程的描述中直截了当。报告准则与O'Neill(2002)被描述为“审计议程”和“开放议程”时,可以通过同行评估更容易地评估报告的完整性和透明度。反过来,这促进了对研究调查结果和报告的信任,并最终研究了研究过程。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Research Ethics》 |2021年第3期|共2页
  • 作者

    Stuart G. Nicholls;

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-19 03:23:34

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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