Research Fraud Needn't Happen At All: Experts Say it is the Shared Responsibility of Institutions, Funding Agencies, Journal Editors and Principal Investigators to Prevent Research Fraud. Here's How

Analysis of the Trends in Biochemical Research Using Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA)

Processes ◽

10.3390/pr7060379 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 7 (6) ◽

pp. 379 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Kang ◽

Kim ◽

Kang

Keyword(s):

Topic Modeling ◽

Latent Dirichlet Allocation ◽

Research Topics ◽

Helpful Tool ◽

Journal Editors ◽

The Past ◽

Mining Technique ◽

Modeling Analysis ◽

Funding Agencies ◽

Biochemical Research

Biochemistry has been broadly defined as “chemistry of molecules included or related to living systems”, but is becoming increasingly hard to be distinguished from other related fields. Targets of its studies evolve rapidly; some newly emerge, disappear, combine, or resurface themselves with a fresh viewpoint. Methodologies for biochemistry have been extremely diversified, thanks particularly to those adopted from molecular biology, synthetic chemistry, and biophysics. Therefore, this paper adopts topic modeling, a text mining technique, to identify the research topics in the field of biochemistry over the past twenty years and quantitatively analyze the changes in its trends. The results of the topic modeling analysis obtained through this study will provide a helpful tool for researchers, journal editors, publishers, and funding agencies to understand the connections among the diverse sub-fields in biochemical research and even see how the research topics branch out and integrate with other fields.

Download Full-text

A call to accompany pre-registration with means to valuable and effective exploration

10.31234/osf.io/psfqw ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Michael Höfler ◽

Stefan Scherbaum ◽

Philipp Kanske ◽

Robert Miller

Keyword(s):

Research Agenda ◽

Journal Editors ◽

Funding Agencies ◽

Replication Crisis ◽

Peer Reviewers ◽

New Research ◽

Research Domains

Harking and p-hacking are considered as main causes of the replication crisis, and pre-registration of hypotheses and analyses is regarded as the best countermeasure so far. However, the pressure to produce purportedly confirming results through hidden exploration largely resists. While some pre-registration advocates encourage the alternative of honest and comprehensive explorative research, others accuse pre-registration of harming exploration. We argue that researchers must be equipped with competencies on valuable exploration if pre-registration is to become mainstream and exploration is to be freed from its narrowed and flawed purpose. We discuss what valuable exploration should be: honest, as full as necessary (especially in new research domains) and as efficient as possible (resulting in only few and presumably true new hypotheses). After discussions on methods for filtering explorative results and pre-registration we end with a short research agenda on exploration and proposals for implementation to stakeholders (peer-reviewers, journal editors and funding agencies) who have the means both to enforce pre-registration and to provide room for valuable exploration. For example, we propose that yet a study abstract must contain separated lists of confirmatory results and new hypotheses obtained from exploration.

Download Full-text

Key Principles in Ethical Data Analysis and Handling Conflicts of Interest

10.1093/oso/9780190095918.003.0004 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 81-123

Author(s):

Seth J. Schwartz

Keyword(s):

Data Analysis ◽

Ethical Issues ◽

Conflicts Of Interest ◽

University Administrators ◽

Grant Funding ◽

Publish Or Perish ◽

Journal Editors ◽

Funding Agencies ◽

Data Analytic

This chapter covers ethical issues in data analysis, such as p-hacking (massaging data until significant results emerge) and HARKing (hypothesizing after the results are known). The chapter also discusses conflicts of interest, including financial conflicts as well as unreasonable ambition, egotism, “publish or perish” pressures that academics face, and pressures to secure grant funding. Recommendations are provided for avoiding and managing these challenges. Having multiple people conducting analyses is suggested as one way to maximize the likelihood of ethical data analysis. The chapter also provides recommendations for journal editors, department and university administrators, and funding agencies for ensuring that they do not inadvertently incentivize unethical data analytic practices.

Download Full-text

Research Openness in Canadian Political Science: Toward an Inclusive and Differentiated Discussion

Canadian Journal of Political Science ◽

10.1017/s0008423917000026 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 50 (1) ◽

pp. 311-328 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Genevieve Fuji Johnson ◽

Mark Pickup ◽

Eline A. de Rooij ◽

Rémi Léger

Keyword(s):

Data Management ◽

Political Science ◽

Data Access ◽

Journal Editors ◽

Funding Agencies ◽

Science Community ◽

Research Transparency ◽

Political Science Journals

AbstractIn this paper, we initiate a discussion within the Canadian political science community about research openness and its implications for our discipline. This discussion is important because the Tri-Agency has recently released guidelines on data management and because a number of political science journals, from several subfields, have signed the Journal Editors’ Transparency Statement requiring data access and research transparency (DA-RT). As norms regarding research openness develop, an increasing number and range of journals and funding agencies may begin to implement DA-RT-type requirements. If Canadian political scientists wish to continue to participate in the global political science community, we must take careful note of and be proactive participants in the ongoing developments concerning research openness.

Download Full-text

Research Misconduct in Business and Management Studies: Causes, Consequences, and Possible Remedies

Journal of Management Inquiry ◽

10.1177/1056492618792621 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 29 (2) ◽

pp. 174-187 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Dennis Tourish ◽

Russell Craig

Keyword(s):

Scientific Community ◽

Research Misconduct ◽

Research Integrity ◽

Research Practices ◽

Questionable Research Practices ◽

Journal Editors ◽

Recommendations For Action ◽

Research Fraud ◽

Depth Interviews ◽

Business And Management

This article analyses 131 articles that have been retracted from peer-reviewed journals in business and management studies. We also draw from six in-depth interviews: three with journal editors involved in retractions, two with coauthors of papers retracted because a fellow author committed research fraud, and one with a former academic found guilty of research fraud. Our aim is to promote debate about the causes and consequences of research misconduct and to suggest possible remedies. Drawing on corruption theory, we suggest that a range of institutional, environmental, and behavioral factors interacts to provide incentives that sustain research misconduct. We explore the research practices that have prompted retractions. We contend that some widely used, but questionable research practices, should be challenged so as to promote stronger commitment to research integrity and to deter misconduct. To this end, we propose eleven recommendations for action by authors, editors, publishers, and the broader scientific community.

Download Full-text

Food Safety Security: A new Concept for Enhancing Food Safety Measures

International Journal for Vitamin and Nutrition Research ◽

10.1024/0300-9831/a000114 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 82 (3) ◽

pp. 216-222 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Venkatesh Iyengar ◽

Ibrahim Elmadfa

Keyword(s):

Food Safety ◽

Hazard Analysis ◽

Warning System ◽

Shared Responsibility ◽

Fine Tuning ◽

Strategic Action ◽

Surveillance Network ◽

Measurement Systems ◽

Critical Control Points ◽

The Impact

The food safety security (FSS) concept is perceived as an early warning system for minimizing food safety (FS) breaches, and it functions in conjunction with existing FS measures. Essentially, the function of FS and FSS measures can be visualized in two parts: (i) the FS preventive measures as actions taken at the stem level, and (ii) the FSS interventions as actions taken at the root level, to enhance the impact of the implemented safety steps. In practice, along with FS, FSS also draws its support from (i) legislative directives and regulatory measures for enforcing verifiable, timely, and effective compliance; (ii) measurement systems in place for sustained quality assurance; and (iii) shared responsibility to ensure cohesion among all the stakeholders namely, policy makers, regulators, food producers, processors and distributors, and consumers. However, the functional framework of FSS differs from that of FS by way of: (i) retooling the vulnerable segments of the preventive features of existing FS measures; (ii) fine-tuning response systems to efficiently preempt the FS breaches; (iii) building a long-term nutrient and toxicant surveillance network based on validated measurement systems functioning in real time; (iv) focusing on crisp, clear, and correct communication that resonates among all the stakeholders; and (v) developing inter-disciplinary human resources to meet ever-increasing FS challenges. Important determinants of FSS include: (i) strengthening international dialogue for refining regulatory reforms and addressing emerging risks; (ii) developing innovative and strategic action points for intervention {in addition to Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) procedures]; and (iii) introducing additional science-based tools such as metrology-based measurement systems.

Download Full-text