Management Science on the Credibility Bubble: Cardinal Sins and Various Misdemeanors.

Bedeian, Arthur G.; Taylor, Shannon G.; Miller, Alan N.

doi:10.5465/amle.2010.56659889

Cited by 112 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A “trampling of the scientific ethos” witnessed in areas as diverse as climate science and galvanic corrosion undermines the “credibility of everyone in science” (Bedeian et al , 2010; Oreskes and Conway, 2010; Edwards, 2012; Leiserowitz et al , 2012; The Economist, 2013; BBC, 2016). The Economist recently highlighted the prevalence of shoddy and nonreproducible modern scientific research and its high financial cost to society—posing an open question as to whether modern science was trustworthy, while calling upon science to reform itself (The Economist, 2013).…”

Section: Systemic Risks To Scientific Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Academic Research in the 21st Century: Maintaining Scientific Integrity in a Climate of Perverse Incentives and Hypercompetition

Edwards

Roy

2017

Environmental Engineering Science

482

366

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last 50 years, we argue that incentives for academic scientists have become increasingly perverse in terms of competition for research funding, development of quantitative metrics to measure performance, and a changing business model for higher education itself. Furthermore, decreased discretionary funding at the federal and state level is creating a hypercompetitive environment between government agencies (e.g., EPA, NIH, CDC), for scientists in these agencies, and for academics seeking funding from all sources—the combination of perverse incentives and decreased funding increases pressures that can lead to unethical behavior. If a critical mass of scientists become untrustworthy, a tipping point is possible in which the scientific enterprise itself becomes inherently corrupt and public trust is lost, risking a new dark age with devastating consequences to humanity. Academia and federal agencies should better support science as a public good, and incentivize altruistic and ethical outcomes, while de-emphasizing output.

show abstract

Section: Systemic Risks To Scientific Integritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Academic Research in the 21st Century: Maintaining Scientific Integrity in a Climate of Perverse Incentives and Hypercompetition

Edwards

Roy

2017

Environmental Engineering Science

482

366

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• Bedeian et al (2010) found that 79 % of researchers surveyed reported having observed others withholding methodological details or results. Ninety-two percent of respondents also reported having seen others present post hoc findings as those developed a priori and 78 % saw others selectively report findings.…”

Section: Evidence From Observer-report Surveysmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, estimates of data falsification from self-reports are roughly 1-2 % (Banks et al 2016;John et al 2012). However, when observer reports are used, this number may be as large as 7 % (Banks et al 2016), 14 % (Fanelli 2009), or even 27 % (Bedeian et al 2010). Other levels of engagement in QRPs may be considered ''bad,'' but less harmful, such as inappropriately rounding p values (Banks et al 2016;John et al 2012).…”

Section: Evidence From Observer-report Surveysmentioning

confidence: 99%

Editorial: Evidence on Questionable Research Practices: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Questionable research or reporting practices (QRPs) contribute to a growing concern regarding the credibility of research in the organizational sciences and related fields. Such practices include design, analytic, or reporting practices that may introduce biased evidence, which can have harmful implications for evidence-based practice, theory development, and perceptions of the rigor of science. Design/Methodology/Approach To assess the extent to which QRPs are actually a concern, we conducted a systematic review to consider the evidence on QRPs. Using a triangulation approach (e.g., by reviewing data from observations, sensitivity analyses, and surveys), we identified the good, the bad, and the ugly. Findings Of the 64 studies that fit our criteria, 6 appeared to find little to no evidence of engagement in QRPs and the other 58 found more severe evidence (91 %). Implications Drawing upon the findings, we provide recommendations for future research related to publication practices and academic training. Originality/value We report findings from studies that suggest that QRPs are not a problem, that QRPs are used at a suboptimal rate, and that QRPs present a threat to the viability of organizational science research.

show abstract

“…As a subcategory of research dishonesty, plagiarism is the representation of the work of another, or one's own work, without acknowledgement of such work and can include careless paraphrasing, the copying of identical text or providing incomplete references that mislead the reader into believing that the ideas expressed belong to the author of the text. 2,3 Over the past years student plagiarism has commanded much research attention [4][5][6][7][8] , with increasing focus on the detection of plagiarism 9 and ways of addressing it 4 . However, relatively little has been published about plagiarism committed by academics [10][11][12][13] , with research thus far regarded as largely anecdotal and speculative 2 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plagiarism in South African management journals

Thomas¹,

Bruin²

2015

S. Afr. J. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plagiarism by academics has been relatively unexplored thus far. However, there has been a growing awareness of this problem in recent years. We submitted 371 published academic articles appearing in 19 South African management journals in 2011 through the plagiarism detection software program Turnitin™. High and excessive levels of plagiarism were detected. The cost to government of subsidising unoriginal work in these journals was calculated to approximate ZAR7 million for the period under review. As academics are expected to role model ethical behaviour to students, such a finding is disturbing and has implications for the reputations of the institutions to which the authors are affiliated as well as that of the journals that publish articles that contain plagiarised material.

show abstract

Management Science on the Credibility Bubble: Cardinal Sins and Various Misdemeanors.

Cited by 112 publications

References 35 publications

Academic Research in the 21st Century: Maintaining Scientific Integrity in a Climate of Perverse Incentives and Hypercompetition

Academic Research in the 21st Century: Maintaining Scientific Integrity in a Climate of Perverse Incentives and Hypercompetition

Editorial: Evidence on Questionable Research Practices: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Plagiarism in South African management journals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About