Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorFeenstra, Ramon A
dc.contributor.authorDelgado López-Cózar, Emilio 
dc.contributor.authorDomínguez-Pallarés, Daniel
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-04T07:27:39Z
dc.date.available2021-02-04T07:27:39Z
dc.date.issued2020-10-11
dc.identifier.citationFeenstra, R.A., Delgado López-Cózar, E. & Pallarés-Domínguez, D. (2020) Research Misconduct in the Fields of Ethics and Philosophy: Researchers’ Perceptions in Spaines_ES
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10481/66271
dc.descriptionThis is the Author’s Original Manuscript (AOM) (also called a “preprint”) sent to review to Science and Engineering Ethics on 11/10/2020. The final version of the article was published online at SEE on 21/01/2021. The online version is available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00278-wes_ES
dc.description.abstractEmpirical studies have revealed a disturbing prevalence of research misconduct in a wide variety of disciplines, although not, to date, in the areas of ethics and philosophy. This study aims to provide empirical evidence on perceptions of how serious a problem research misconduct is in these two disciplines in Spain, particularly regarding the effects that the model used to evaluate academics’ research performance may have on their ethical behaviour. The methodological triangulation applied in the study combines a questionnaire, a debate at the annual meeting of scientific association, and in-depth interviews. Of the 541 questionnaires sent out, 201 responses were obtained (37.1% of the total sample), with a significant difference in the participation of researchers in philosophy (30.5%) and in ethics (52.8%); 26 researchers took part in the debate and 14 interviews were conducted. The questionnaire results reveal that 91.5% of the respondents considered research misconduct to be on the rise; 63.2% considered at least three of the fraudulent practices referred to in the study to be commonplace, and 84.1% identified two or more such practices. The researchers perceived a high prevalence of duplicate publication (66.5%) and self-plagiarism (59.0%), use of personal influence (57.5%) and citation manipulation (44.0%), in contrast to a low perceived incidence of data falsification or fabrication (10.0%). The debate and the interviews corroborated these data. Researchers associated the spread of these misconducts with the research evaluation model applied in Spain.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/*
dc.subjectResearch misconductes_ES
dc.subjectethicses_ES
dc.subjectphilosophyes_ES
dc.subjectevaluation policyes_ES
dc.subjectResearch policyes_ES
dc.subjectResearch evaluationes_ES
dc.subjectScientific fraudes_ES
dc.subjectself-plagiarismes_ES
dc.subjectplagiarismes_ES
dc.subjectcitation manipulationes_ES
dc.titleResearch misconduct in the fields of ethics and philosophy: researchers’ perceptions in Spaines_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/preprintes_ES
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s11948-021-00278-w
dc.type.hasVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/submittedVersiones_ES


Ficheros en el ítem

[PDF]
[PDF]

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España