Scholarlink

<p>Scientific misconduct and questionable research practices (QRPs) pose significant challenges to the integrity of academic research. This study therefore investigates scientists’ implicit associations regarding misconduct and its relationship with perceived academic success. Employing the Single-Category Implicit Association Test (SC-IAT), the attitudes of 11,747 scientists across Austria, Germany, and Switzerland were examined. Results suggest that only a very low fraction of researchers associate serious misconduct with success, yet approximately one-fifth of participants associate QRPs with success. Gender and discipline-based distinctions were minimal, with notable inclinations among PhD students decreasing with status. However, limitations exist, including the lack of validation against explicit attitudes. The decline in the association between QRPs and success with status raises questions about cohort effects or shifting ethical norms. Early intervention and ongoing training efforts may mitigate these issues, emphasizing ethical considerations in scientific practice from undergraduate education onwards. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for fostering integrity in research and guiding future interventions.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Are questionable research practices considered a successful career strategy? A novel implementation of the implicit association test

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月5日

查看全文
  • Antonia Velicu,
  • Fabian Winter,
  • Justus Rathmann,
  • Heiko Rauhut

摘要

Scientific misconduct and questionable research practices (QRPs) pose significant challenges to the integrity of academic research. This study therefore investigates scientists’ implicit associations regarding misconduct and its relationship with perceived academic success. Employing the Single-Category Implicit Association Test (SC-IAT), the attitudes of 11,747 scientists across Austria, Germany, and Switzerland were examined. Results suggest that only a very low fraction of researchers associate serious misconduct with success, yet approximately one-fifth of participants associate QRPs with success. Gender and discipline-based distinctions were minimal, with notable inclinations among PhD students decreasing with status. However, limitations exist, including the lack of validation against explicit attitudes. The decline in the association between QRPs and success with status raises questions about cohort effects or shifting ethical norms. Early intervention and ongoing training efforts may mitigate these issues, emphasizing ethical considerations in scientific practice from undergraduate education onwards. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for fostering integrity in research and guiding future interventions.