2018
DOI: 10.1186/s41073-018-0046-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Designing integrated research integrity training: authorship, publication, and peer review

Abstract: This paper describes the experience of an academic institution, the Queensland University of Technology (QUT), developing training courses about research integrity practices in authorship, publication, and Journal Peer Review. The importance of providing research integrity training in these areas is now widely accepted; however, it remains an open question how best to conduct this training. For this reason, it is vital for institutions, journals, and peak bodies to share learnings. We describe how we have coll… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Mastering the online course ensures that all researchers are familiar with their general responsibilities; face-to-face courses integrate specific content into more general courses:1) the content on researcher's copyright responsibility is integrated into a course on academic writing; 2) the content on research integrity is included into a course on conducting and responding to peer review (Hooper et al, 2018).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mastering the online course ensures that all researchers are familiar with their general responsibilities; face-to-face courses integrate specific content into more general courses:1) the content on researcher's copyright responsibility is integrated into a course on academic writing; 2) the content on research integrity is included into a course on conducting and responding to peer review (Hooper et al, 2018).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, it should become an integral part of health researchers' training programmes rather than an add-on. Integrating such training in existing programmes affords the opportunity for best practices to become the “norm and to promote cultural change in research” [16]. Buy-in from senior faculty and institutions was vital in operationalising our approach.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As research misconduct is a sensitive topic and research integrity is poorly understood, one needs to emphasise that the aim of our programme is not to point fingers and criticise, but to improve knowledge of best practices and promote responsible conduct of research. Furthermore, buy-in from senior academics and professors, in their capacity as mentors, supervisors and role-models of students and junior researchers, adds legitimacy to training initiatives [16]. Although development of institutional policies is a vital first step, they need to be actively promoted and implemented, and discussions on research integrity should be ongoing.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Numerous modes of delivery and pedagogy are employed in RI training programs, from self-paced online courses to face-to-face sessions or a hybrid model of the two delivery modes. In general, the choice of pedagogy and communication for RI training programs mirrors the institutional requirements governing responsible research practices [ 4 ]. For example, NIH mandates at least eight contact hours, while NSF provides no specific guidance or requirements for the structure or format of the training program [ 5 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Involving the faculty in RI education is a crucial step in achieving this. Their expertise adds legitimacy and their experiences provide relatable context to the principles [ 4 ]. Having a systematic and structured approach to RI education also helps to set an explicit standard for upholding RI within an institution.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%