Researchers' Perceptions of a Responsible Research Climate: A Multi Focus Group Study.
Research climate
Research integrity
Responsible conduct of research
Journal
Science and engineering ethics
ISSN: 1471-5546
Titre abrégé: Sci Eng Ethics
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9516228
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2020
12 2020
Historique:
received:
29
12
2019
accepted:
28
07
2020
pubmed:
12
8
2020
medline:
19
8
2021
entrez:
12
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The research climate plays a key role in fostering integrity in research. However, little is known about what constitutes a responsible research climate. We investigated academic researchers' perceptions on this through focus group interviews. We recruited researchers from the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and the Amsterdam University Medical Center to participate in focus group discussions that consisted of researchers from similar academic ranks and disciplinary fields. We asked participants to reflect on the characteristics of a responsible research climate, the barriers they perceived and which interventions they thought fruitful to improve the research climate. Discussions were recorded and transcribed at verbatim. We used inductive content analysis to analyse the focus group transcripts. We conducted 12 focus groups with 61 researchers in total. We identified fair evaluation, openness, sufficient time, integrity, trust and freedom to be mentioned as important characteristics of a responsible research climate. Main perceived barriers were lack of support, unfair evaluation policies, normalization of overwork and insufficient supervision of early career researchers. Possible interventions suggested by the participants centered around improving support, discussing expectations and improving the quality of supervision. Some of the elements of a responsible research climate identified by participants are reflected in national and international codes of conduct, such as trust and openness. Although it may seem hard to change the research climate, we believe that the realisation that the research climate is suboptimal should provide the impetus for change informed by researchers' experiences and opinions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32779115
doi: 10.1007/s11948-020-00256-8
pii: 10.1007/s11948-020-00256-8
pmc: PMC7755866
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3017-3036Références
PLoS Biol. 2020 Jul 16;18(7):e3000737
pubmed: 32673304
Environ Eng Sci. 2017 Jan 1;34(1):51-61
pubmed: 28115824
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2014 Dec;9(5):72-88
pubmed: 25747692
Account Res. 2018;25(2):79-93
pubmed: 29291621
Sci Eng Ethics. 2001 Jul;7(4):455-68
pubmed: 11697001
Infect Immun. 2012 Mar;80(3):891-6
pubmed: 22184414
Acad Med. 2012 Jul;87(7):877-82
pubmed: 22622208
F1000Res. 2015 Mar 13;4:66
pubmed: 25866623
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 04;4:MR000038
pubmed: 27040721
Sci Technol Human Values. 1983 Fall;8(4):12-22
pubmed: 11651715
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2006 Mar;1(1):43-50
pubmed: 16810336
Am J Bioeth. 2002 Fall;2(4):51-3
pubmed: 12762926
J Adv Nurs. 2008 Apr;62(1):107-15
pubmed: 18352969
Sci Eng Ethics. 2013 Sep;19(3):835-50
pubmed: 23096774
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2010 Sep;5(3):67-83
pubmed: 20831422
PLoS One. 2016 Mar 11;11(3):e0151571
pubmed: 26967736
Account Res. 2015;22(3):148-61
pubmed: 25635847
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2006 Mar;1(1):51-66
pubmed: 16810337
BMJ Open. 2016 Feb 17;6(2):e008681
pubmed: 26888726
Sci Eng Ethics. 2007 Dec;13(4):437-61
pubmed: 18030595
Annu Rev Psychol. 2013;64:361-88
pubmed: 22856467