Mentoring matters

Whitney, Anne Elrod; Olcese, Nicole

doi:10.1038/ncb0210-101

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, training is needed when making the transition from doing research inside another investigator’s group to leading one’s own research team. Rather than describing this training as “RCR education,” it may be more effective to refer to it as “leadership development.” There are some existing programs in mentoring skills and lab management [59, 60], but such programs generally remain optional.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The lab management practices of “Research Exemplars” that foster research rigor and regulatory compliance: A qualitative study of successful principal investigators

Antes¹,

Kuykendall²,

DuBois³

2019

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Conducting rigorous scientific inquiry within the bounds of research regulation and acceptable practice requires a principal investigator to lead and manage research processes and personnel. This study explores the practices used by investigators nominated as exemplars of research excellence and integrity to produce rigorous, reproducible research and comply with research regulations. Methods Using a qualitative research design, we interviewed 52 principal investigators working in the United States at top research universities and the National Institutes of Health Intramural Research Program. We solicited nominations of researchers meeting two criteria: (1) they are federally-funded researchers doing high-quality, high-impact research, and (2) have reputations for professionalism and integrity. Each investigator received an initial nomination addressing both criteria and at least one additional endorsement corroborating criteria 2. A panel of researchers and our research team reviewed the nominations to select finalists who were invited to participate. The cohort of “Research Exemplars” includes highly accomplished researchers in diverse scientific disciplines. The semi-structured interview questions asked them to describe the routine practices they employ to foster rigor and regulatory compliance. We used inductive thematic analysis to identify common practices. Results The exemplars identified a core set of 8 practices and provided strategies for employing them. The practices included holding regular team meetings, encouraging shared ownership, providing supervision, ensuring adequate training, fostering positive attitudes about compliance, scrutinizing data and findings, and following standard operating procedures. Above all, the use of these practices aim to create a psychologically safe work environment in which lab members openly collaborate to scrutinize their work and share in accountability for rigorous, compliant research. Conclusions Researchers typically receive limited systematic training in how to lead and manage their research teams. Training and education for principal investigators should include essential leadership and management practices and strategies that support doing high-quality research with integrity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The lab management practices of “Research Exemplars” that foster research rigor and regulatory compliance: A qualitative study of successful principal investigators

Antes¹,

Kuykendall²,

DuBois³

2019

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mentoring is an integral part of scientific activity for raising the next generation of scientists, teachers, and innovators [18][19][20]. The ethics encompass the whole hog of day to day interactions of senior faculty, juniors, scholars, students and the support staff in research and academics.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethics in Science

Sharma

2015

Indian J Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ethics are a set of moral principles and values a civilized society follows. Doing science with principles of ethics is the bedrock of scientific activity. The society trusts that the results and the projected outcome of any scientific activity is based on an honest and conscientious attempt by the scientific community. However, during the last few decades, there has been an explosion of knowledge and the advent of digital age. We can access the publications of competitors with just a ''click''. The evaluation parameters have evolved a lot and are based on impact factors, h-index and citations. There is a general feeling that the scientific community is under a lot of pressure for fulfilling the criteria for upward growth and even retention of the positions held. The noble profession of scientific research and academics has been marred by the temptation to falsify and fabricate data, plagiarism and other unethical practices. Broadly speaking, the breach of ethics involves: plagiarism, falsification of data, redundant (duplicate) publication, drawing far-fetched conclusions without hard data, for early publicity, gift authorship (receiving as well as giving), not giving sufficient attention and consideration to scholars and post-docs as per the norms, self promotion at the cost of team-members, treating colleagues (overall all juniors) in a feudal way and Machiavellianism (cunningness and duplicity in general conduct and push to positions of power and pelf). Misconduct in Indian academics and science is also under a lot of focus. It is important and urgent that science, engineering, and health departments and institutions in our country have in place systems for education and training in pursuit of science with ethics by sound and professional courses in Responsible Conduct of Research. All research and academic institution must have the Office of Ethics for information, guidelines, training and professional oversight of conduct of research with the ethos and ethics of research.

show abstract

Implementing and measuring the impact of a clinical and translational research mentor recognition program

Byks-Jazayeri

Samuels

Anderson

et al. 2018

J. Clin. Trans. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionResearch shows incentives can motivate faculty to increase their engagement in mentoring, despite a myriad of institutional barriers. One such incentive may be the implementation of a university-wide mentor award program to promote a culture of mentorship.MethodsA new mentorship award was created at a research-intensive university and faculty recipients were surveyed to assess their perceptions of the award’s impact on their mentoring practices and career.ResultsSixty-two percent of awardees (n=21) completed the survey and felt the recognition incentivized them to engage in further mentoring and participate in formal mentorship training. Most awardees referenced the award in their CVs, performance evaluations, and grant proposals. Additionally, they felt the award effectively promoted mentoring among the broader faculty community.ConclusionGrowth of clinical and translational research depends in part on the mentorship received by early career faculty. Therefore, other research universities may benefit from implementing such awards.

show abstract

Mentoring matters

Abstract: Mentoring enhances the experience of mentees; however, mentors and their institutions will also reap the rewards of a mentorship culture.

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

The lab management practices of “Research Exemplars” that foster research rigor and regulatory compliance: A qualitative study of successful principal investigators

The lab management practices of “Research Exemplars” that foster research rigor and regulatory compliance: A qualitative study of successful principal investigators

Ethics in Science

Implementing and measuring the impact of a clinical and translational research mentor recognition program

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About