4.5 Article

Expanding Research Integrity: A Cultural-Practice Perspective

期刊

SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS
卷 27, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11948-021-00291-z

关键词

Research practice; Research culture; Institutions; Research integrity; Research ethics

资金

  1. ZonMw [445001010]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research integrity involves responsibilities of individual researchers and institutions, as well as the role of culture and practice. Specific ideas on practice and culture can help identify points of intervention for fostering responsible conduct. This conceptual framework can avoid vague additional burdens of responsibility for individuals.
Research integrity (RI) is usually discussed in terms of responsibilities that individual researchers bear towards the scientific work they conduct, as well as responsibilities that institutions have to enable those individual researchers to do so. In addition to these two bearers of responsibility, a third category often surfaces, which is variably referred to as culture and practice. These notions merit further development beyond a residual category that is to contain everything that is not covered by attributions to individuals and institutions. This paper discusses how thinking in RI can take benefit from more specific ideas on practice and culture. We start by articulating elements of practice and culture, and explore how values central to RI are related to these elements. These insights help identify additional points of intervention for fostering responsible conduct. This helps to build cultures and practices of research integrity, as it makes clear that specific times and places are connected to specific practices and cultures and should have a place in the debate on Research Integrity. With this conceptual framework, practitioners as well as theorists can avoid using the notions as residual categories that de facto amount to vague, additional burdens of responsibility for the individual.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据