Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Discovering the Perception and Approach of Researchers and Professors of the University of Medical Sciences in Biased and Unbiased Publication of Scientific Outputs: A Qualitative Study

  • Published:
Publishing Research Quarterly Aims and scope

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate the researchers' approach to the publication of and misconceptions in regard with scientific outputs and affecting factors. The present study was carried out using exploratory qualitative research method and semi-structured interviews in 2017. The research community comprised of faculty members, editors of journals, jury of papers and dissertations, researchers, and graduate students of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences. The sample size of the research was firstly selected through targeted sampling and then with snowball method. The MAXQDA v10 software was used to analyze the findings. Regarding the researchers' approach, a total number of 5 themes were identified. The lengthy process of arbitrating journals and the requirement for a university to publish a specific scientific output leads to inappropriate approaches to the dissemination of scientific outputs. It seems that revising quantitative views on the work of researchers and the development of ethics of science, with emphasis on compliance with the criteria of writing, quality and education of research misconduct in the form of appropriate training and supervision courses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abraham P. Duplicate and salami publications. J Postgrad Med. 2000;46(2):67.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bornmann L. Research misconduct—definitions, manifestations and extent. Publications. 2013;1(3):87–988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Devlin M, Gray K. In their own words: a qualitative study of the reasons Australian university students plagiarize. High Educ Res Dev. 2007;26(2):181–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Dictionary SSM. Redundant Publication. https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Redundant+Publication

  5. Editors ICOMJ. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE): uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: writing and editing for biomedical publication. Haematologica. 2004;89(3):264.

  6. Gollogly L, Momen H. Ethical dilemmas in scientific publication: pitfalls and solutions for editors. Rev Saude Publica. 2006;40(SPE):24–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Keyvanara M, Ojaghi R, Sohrabi MC, Papi A. Experiences of experts about the instances of plagiarism. J Educ Health Promot. 2013;2:32. https://doi.org/10.4103/2277-9531.115817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kornhaber RA, McLean LM, Baber RJ. Ongoing ethical issues concerning authorship in biomedical journals: an integrative review. Int J Nanomed. 2015;10:4837.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Macleod MR, Michie S, Roberts I, Dirnagl U, Chalmers I, Ioannidis JP, Salman RA, Chan AW, Glasziou P. Biomedical research: increasing value, reducing waste. Lancet. 2014;383(9912):101–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Mirzazadeh A, Navadeh S, Rokni M, Farhangniya M. The prevalence of honorary and ghost authorships in Iranian bio-medical journals and its associated factors. Iran J Pub Health. 2011;40(1):15.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pabst S, Brand M, Wolf OT. Stress effects on framed decisions: there are differences for gains and losses. Front Behav Neurosci. 2013;7:142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Rawat S, Meena S. Publish or perish: where are we heading? J Res Med Sci. 2014;19(2):87.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Schofferman J, Wetzel FT, Bono C. Ghost and guest authors: you can't always trust who you read. Pain Med. 2015;16(3):416–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Tian M, Su Y, Ru X. Perish or publish in China: pressures on young Chinese scholars to publish in internationally indexed journals. Publications. 2016;4(2):9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Tijdink JK, Verbeke R, Smulders YM. Publication pressure and scientific misconduct in medical scientists. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2014;9(5):64–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. UCCG, t. [article VI]. 1952. https://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=15381&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html.

  17. van Wesel M. Evaluation by citation: trends in publication behavior, evaluation criteria, and the strive for high impact publications. Sci Eng Ethics. 2016;22(1):199–225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-015-9638-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Vinkers CH, Zorn JV, Cornelisse S, Koot S, Houtepen LC, Olivier B, Verster JC, Kahn RS, Boks MP, Kalenscher T. Time-dependent changes in altruistic punishment following stress. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2013;38(9):1467–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ware M, Mabe M. The STM report: an overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing. The Hague: International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Weijen APDv. Publish or perish? The rise of the fractional author; 2014. https://www.researchtrends.com/issue-38-september-2014/publish-or-perish-the-rise-of-the-fractional-author/

  21. Yazdan M. Critical consideration of ethics in scientific publication book. Ketab Mah Koliat J. 2012;15(9):48–52.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Services Management, Iranian Center of Excellence in Health Management (ICEHM), Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

    Rahim Khodayari-Zarnaq

  2. Department of Medical Library and Information Sciences, School of Management and Medical Informatics, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

    Nahideh Khoshmaram & Vahideh Zarea Gavgani

Authors
  1. Nahideh Khoshmaram
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rahim Khodayari-Zarnaq
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vahideh Zarea Gavgani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rahim Khodayari-Zarnaq.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khoshmaram, N., Khodayari-Zarnaq, R. & Zarea Gavgani, V. Discovering the Perception and Approach of Researchers and Professors of the University of Medical Sciences in Biased and Unbiased Publication of Scientific Outputs: A Qualitative Study. Pub Res Q 35, 436–444 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-019-09655-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-019-09655-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation