Work-Strain, Career Course and Research Integrity

工作压力、职业生涯和研究诚信

• 批准号: 6407020
• 负责人: BRIAN C MARTINSON
• 金额: $ 14.5万
• 依托单位: HEALTHPARTNERS INSTITUTE
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 财政年份: 2001
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2001-09-01 至 2003-08-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://reporter.nih.gov/project-details/6407020
• 关键词: behavioral /social science research tag; coping; data collection methodology /evaluation; ethics; health science profession; health science research; human subject; job performance; morals; occupational psychology; population survey; stress

DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): Ensuring the integrity of scientific research has become an important national priority. Over the past 20 years, the structure, culture and nature of academic science have changed significantly, causing a number of value conflicts for today?s scientists. Increasingly, the values reflected in, and required by, the scientific workplace are at odds with the behavioral norms researchers acquired in their training. Many contemporary discussions of research integrity point to these new and unprecedented value conflicts as the driving factors in scientific misconduct. And yet, most proposals for ensuring research integrity tend to focus on "bad actors," individuals lacking adequate moral grounding, thereby suggesting a curricular response to ensure and maintain ethical conduct. We believe that deviations from scientific standards cannot be fully understood with exclusive reference to individual deficiencies, nor can they be adequately explained by looking solely at contextual factors. Our proposed research begins from the assumption - as yet unexplored in the research integrity literature - that the behavior of researchers, for good or ill, must be understood in terms of the interaction between structural constraints, organizational contexts and individual characteristics. The present research is designed to develop and test an explanation for unethical conduct among academic scientists that focuses primarily on work-strain. The concept of work-strain, derived from general strain theory, forces us to examine the moral actor in a social context: to consider the moral resources brought to the research setting and the influence of that setting on those resources. We hypothesize that work-strain leads to negative affect, creating differential pressure on scientists that, among other outcomes, may lead to questionable research practices. We test this and other hypotheses with data from a cross-sectional, anonymous survey administered to a random sample of 2,000 recent NIH-supported postdoctoral trainees and a similar random sample of 2,000 recent R01 supported scientists. Primary outcome measures include subscription to scientific norms and counternorms, adherence to these norms, and self-reported research behavior ranging from unintentional errors, through reckless or negligent behavior, to serious misconduct in terms of plagiarism and data fabrication or falsification.

描述（由申请人提供）：确保科学的完整性 研究已成为重要的国家优先事项。在过去的20年中， 学术科学的结构，文化和性质发生了很大变化， 为当今的科学家造成许多价值冲突。越来越多的人 科学工作场所反映和要求的价值与 研究人员在培训中获得了行为规范。许多当代 研究完整性的讨论指向这些新的和前所未有的价值 冲突是科学不当行为的驱动因素。但是，大多数 确保研究完整性的建议倾向于专注于“不良行为者”， 缺乏足够道德基础的个人，从而建议课程 响应以确保和维持道德行为。我们相信偏差 根据科学标准，不能完全理解独家参考 对于个人缺陷，看不到它们也无法充分解释 仅在上下文因素上。我们提出的研究从假设开始 - 在研究完整性文献中尚未探索 - 对于好或生病，研究人员必须根据互动来理解 在结构性约束，组织环境和个人之间 特征。 本研究旨在开发和测试解释 主要关注的学术科学家的不道德行为 工作局。源自一般应变理论的工作应变概念， 迫使我们在社会背景下检查道德演员：考虑道德 为研究环境带来的资源以及该环境的影响 这些资源。我们假设工作应变会导致负面影响， 对科学家产生巨大压力，除其他结果外， 导致可疑的研究实践。我们用 来自随机样本的横截面匿名调查的数据 最近2,000名NIH支持的博士后学员和类似的随机样本 最近有2,000名R01支持科学家。主要结果指标包括 订阅科学规范和反对派，遵守这些规范， 以及自我报告的研究行为，从无意的错误到 鲁ck或疏忽的行为，以窃的严重不当行为 以及数据制造或伪造。