Background

Concerns about research misbehavior in academic science have sparked interest in the factors that may explain research misbehavior. Often three clusters of factors are distinguished: individual factors, climate factors and publication factors. Our research question was: to what extent can individual, climate and publication factors explain the variance in frequently perceived research misbehaviors?

Methods

From May 2017 until July 2017, we conducted a survey study among academic researchers in Amsterdam. The survey included three measurement instruments that we previously reported individual results of and here we integrate these findings.

Results

One thousand two hundred ninety-eight researchers completed the survey (response rate: 17%). Results showed that individual, climate and publication factors combined explained 34% of variance in perceived frequency of research misbehavior. Individual factors explained 7%, climate factors explained 22% and publication factors 16%.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that the perceptions of the research climate play a substantial role in explaining variance in research misbehavior. This suggests that efforts to improve departmental norms might have a salutary effect on behavior.

中文翻译：

---

解释感知研究不当行为的差异：阿姆斯特丹学术研究人员的一项调查结果

背景

对学术科学中研究不当行为的担忧引发了人们对可能解释研究不当行为的因素的兴趣。通常区分三组因素：个人因素、气候因素和出版因素。我们的研究问题是：个人、气候和出版因素在多大程度上可以解释常见的研究不当行为的差异？

方法

从2017年5月到2017年7月，我们对阿姆斯特丹的学术研究人员进行了一项调查研究。该调查包括我们之前报告过的三种测量工具的单独结果，在这里我们整合了这些发现。

结果

1298 名研究人员完成了调查（回复率：17%）。结果显示，个人、气候和出版因素综合解释了 34% 的研究不当行为感知频率差异。个人因素占 7%，气候因素占 22%，出版因素占 16%。

结论

我们的研究结果表明，对研究氛围的看法在解释研究不当行为的差异方面发挥着重要作用。这表明改善部门规范的努力可能会对行为产生有益的影响。