Research Integrity in a Developing Country: Review and Analysis (Issues, Challenges, and Opportuniti

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017

Research Integrity in a Developing Country: Review and Analysis (Issues, Challenges, and Opportunities) By:

Rakib Ahmed Senior Lecturer, Eastern University, Bangladesh Email: rakibcau@yahoo.com

Abstract: Research integrity, research misconduct, ethics in research is profound terms. Research integrity is simply, justice and honesty in conducting research where research misconduct is just opposite including insufficient care for the subject of research; breaches of confidentiality, improprieties of publication involving conflict of interest. It‘s harmful for society. If someone involved embezzling, plagiarizing, stealing the output of others, such as methodology, output, data including unpublished is called violation of academic or research ethics. This research paper tried to find out the core concepts of research, integrity, misconduct, ethics, and issues related to research integrity in a developing country like Bangladesh. The broad objective of the study was to review and analyze the challenges and opportunities of research integrity in a developing country like Bangladesh. It‘s an exploratory and qualitative research based on mainly secondary sources of data. Various literatures have been reviewed for the desired data. Promoting research integrity in a developing country like Bangladesh requires a greater understanding. There is a dearth of IDL - International Digital Library

empirical research addressing issues related to research integrity and misconduct in science, business, environment etc. This paper found many challenges in this regard and also a great opportunity to overcome those. More research on these issues might be supported not only to provide useful guidance to researchers, policy makers but also to stimulate a critical mass of scholars to develop research on research integrity as a legitimate field of scientific inquiry.

Keywords: Research integrity, Research misconduct, Ethics, Developing country, Bangladesh.

Classification: Research Paper 1. INTRODUCTION Research, by its very nature, is founded on honesty and competition, on data that is real, yet selective, and on an open critique of conceptual and methodological frameworks among peers but increasingly also other societal actors.

Research Integrity (RI) has long been considered 1|P a g e

Copyright@IDL-2017

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017 

to be a part of science governance as opposed to requiring statutory legislation, since codes of conduct and recommendations for Good Research Practice (GRP) are dependent on understanding and upholding core research values. On the other hand, there are situations where serious deviations from GRP constitute a statutory offence, and where the case at hand is subject to the laws of the land.

Promoting research integrity in a developing country like Bangladesh requires a greater understanding than we now have of the factors that influence the full range of research conduct.

There is a dearth of empirical research addressing issues related to research integrity and misconduct in science. It is critical, therefore, that more research on these issues be supported, not only to provide useful guidance to researchers and to the formulation of appropriately measured policy, but also to stimulate a critical mass of scholars to develop research on research integrity as a legitimate field of scientific inquiry. Such research must employ rigorous research designs and methods of evaluation.

In this research paper it is tried to find out the core concepts of research, integrity, misconduct, ethics, and issues related to research integrity in a developing country like Bangladesh. Here it‘s also tried to determine the potential challenges and opportunities of research integrity in a developing country.

2. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY The broad objective of the study is to review and analyze the challenges and opportunities of research integrity in a developing country like Bangladesh.

The specific objectives are:

IDL - International Digital Library





To review and sort out the issues of research misconduct and integrity in a developing country like Bangladesh.

To determine and evaluate the challenges and opportunities of research integrity in a developing country like Bangladesh.

To recommend some measure to overcome such challenges.

3. CORE CONCEPTS OF RESEARCH 3.1 Research Integrity Research integrity is simply, justice and honesty in proposing, conducting, and reporting research or doing it right and telling the truth about what you did. In other words, it means that one conducts one‘s research as carefully as one can and present the results as honestly as one can.

Integrity in research embraces the aspirational standard of scientific conduct rather than simply the avoidance of questionable practices (Swazey 1993: 202; King and Anderson, 1999:34; Steneck, 2003:401; Iverson and Siang, 2003:64; Whitbeck, 2004:85).

3.2 Academic or Research Misconduct The term ‗research misconduct‘ is meant to embrace many things, including insufficient care for the people, animals or objects that are the subject of or participants in research; breaches of confidentiality, violation of protocols, carelessness of the kind that leads to gross error and improprieties of publication involving conflict of interest or appropriation of ideas.

Research misconduct is harmful for knowledge.

It could mislead other researchers, it may threaten individuals or society – for instance if it becomes the basis for unsafe drugs or unwise legislation – and, by subverting the public‘s 2|P a g e

Copyright@IDL-2017

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017 trust, it could lead to a disregard for or undesirable restrictions being imposed on research. Research misconduct can appear in many guises:

considered as ethics violation. It is enormous imperative to ensure the ethics in the research.

4. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY



Fabrication involves making up results and recording them as if they were real;  Falsification involves manipulating research processes or changing or omitting data;  Plagiarism is the appropriation of other people‘s material without giving proper credit;  Other forms of misconduct include failure to meet clear ethical and legal requirements such as misrepresentation of interests, breach of confidentiality, lack of informed consent and abuse of research subjects or materials.

Misconduct also includes improper dealing with infringements, such as attempts to cover up misconduct and reprisals on whistleblowers;  Minor misdemeanors may not lead to formal investigations, but are just as damaging given their probable frequency, and should be corrected by teachers and mentors.

3.3 Ethics in Research If someone involved to embezzle, plagiarize, steal the output of others, such as the material, methodology, output, report, program and data including unpublished is called violation of academic or research ethics. It also include not only revising and faking the research data (e.g. experiment and survey data, and statistic results) but also hiding the negative data to pretend to be the innovation output. Using the output accomplished by the research team in own outputs without indicating that also violation of ethics in research. Sending one manuscript to different journals at the same time and/ or other misconducts in research activities also IDL - International Digital Library

This is very significant paper for the students and the teachers as well as the researchers.

Because this paper tried to explain the basic issues related to the research integrity. Not only that there was an attempt to determine and explain the potential challenges and opportunities of research integrity in a developing country. By reading this paper one may learn about what is research, what is integrity in research, what is research misconduct and their impact on our life. One can be able to measure the barriers and prospects of integrity in research.

5. LITERATURE REVIEW OF THE STUDY Bolton (2002: 67), defines research integrity as: ...‖ the process o f doing and reporting science in accordance with accepted practices in their field. This includes adherence to the prin cip les and practice s o f scientific standards, education and mentoring, unbiased peer and expert review and communication o f results to the scientific community”. This definition of research integrity seems to be aligned with our belief that not only the researcher, but also the environment and the whole research community is responsible for the promotion of research integrity.

The most basic tenets of research integrity are: trustworthiness and credibility of the findings.

(Swazey, 1993: 2002; King, and Anderson 1999: 37). Research integrity should be an ethic that is transmitted down the generational tree, nourished and sustained through individual selfreflection and a continuous bi-directional 3|P a g e

Copyright@IDL-2017

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017 vertical and horizontal communication among members of the scientific community (Bolton, 2002:78). It should be validated through a continuous dialogue with society because the society is a major stakeholder in addressing the issues of research integrity. The aim of research ethics is to protect members of society as well as to protect the integrity of science itself.

According to the Natal Academic Press (1999), promotion of integrity in the research environment is about institutional culture and behavior, as well as the professional performance of individuals. We argue and propose that research integrity be viewed positively, from an educational or developmental perspective rather than from a regulatory perspective. We believe that only positive messages will assist researchers in their endeavour to maintain research integrity all the time.

Bolton, (2002: 101) proposes the following aspects of integrity during the conduct of research. These are grouped together as follows: • Childhood socialization. As young children we acquire a moral sense of right and wrong. It is expected that as professionals we will accept the professional standards about data falsification, fabrication and plagiarism.

• Scientific socialization. Student‘s are socialized through education and training of acceptable standards of conducting research.

• Collegial and professional norms. This involves mentoring of junior researchers and postgraduate students.

• Workplace norms, values and incentives. The workplace ‗culture‖ will influence the attitude and the ways in which the rules and standards

IDL - International Digital Library

about research integrity are managed (Bolton, 2002:19) We support Bolton on these aspects. We further argue that the scientific community is another aspect that can play a crucial role in research integrity promotion. We believe that the concept ‗scientific community‘ needs further exploration as well, since scientific ethics forms the basis of research integrity or misconduct.

Research misconduct is concerned with fabricating, falsifying, plagiarizing, or any other practices that seriously deviate from standard acceptable within the scholarly scientific community in proposing, conducting and reporting research (University of California, Los Angeles Policy 993,1998). The White House Office of Science and Technology (OSTP), defined misconduct as: ―fabrication, falsification or plagiarism in proposing performing or reviewing research or in reporting research results”. The policy also states that findings of misconduct require that there be significant departure from acceptable practice. It also states that allegations be proven by a preponderance of evidence.

It also makes reporting of misconduct to be the primary responsibility of the institution where research is conducted (Guenin 1999:340). Most definitions on misconduct highlight the following errors: • Fabrication: This is defined as making up results and recording and reporting them with a deliberate intent to deceive thus disregarding the accepted scientific practice. It also involves changing (manipulating) data or experiments or the conditions to make results ―fit‖ the hypothesis (Guenin: 1999:342).

Other temptations in research may be failure to report research findings that contradict those being reported and failure to report personal interest

4|P a g e

Copyright@IDL-2017

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017 that the researcher may have in the outcome of the research.

• Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, or process or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record (Guenin: 1999:342).

• Plagiarism: Appropriation of another person‘s ideas, processes, results or words without giving appropriate credit, including those obtained from confidential review of others‘ research proposals and manuscripts. Researchers may also steal data from students, colleagues, and proteges.

Plagiarism includes stealing own work or failure to reference own prior work (King and Anderson, 1999; Swazey, 1993).

In our opinions and those of King and Anderson (1999); Swazey (1993); UCLA Policy (1998), research misconduct does not include honest error or difference of opinion or different interpretation of data.

6.4 Limitations of the Study: This is basically an essay type paper. Although it is an essay type paper here it‘s tried to use as much as authentic data possible. Every data and information have been tried to collect from only internet based various sources. However, there is no observed data through primary survey.

7. DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF THE FINDINGS The discussion and analysis of the research findings are exhibited below.

7.1 Potential Approaches to Promote Research Integrity To promote integrity in research we should use and follow some necessary initiatives or approaches. The ESF MO Forum undertook in 2010 a survey of attempts to promote GRP that found a number of successful approaches: 

6. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY



6.1 Type and Nature of Research: This is an exploratory research. By nature it‘s treated as qualitative research.



6.2 Sources of Data: Here only secondary sources of data have been used. No primary data have been used for this study.



6.3 Data Process and Analysis: Since this is a qualitative and exploratory research there is no statistical software been used. For data processing and arranging Microsoft word has been used.



 

IDL - International Digital Library

5|P a g e

Producing and disseminating articles, books, brochures on research integrity; Producing and promoting guidelines on good research practice and on investigations of allegations of research misconduct; Establishing websites and portals as resources for further study and teaching; Holding workshops, conferences, seminars, etc. on research integrity at the national or institutional level in order to launch debates; Establishing an adequate institutional framework, including ethical committees, research integrity bureaus at the institutional and national level); Introducing training programmes for advanced PhD students and other staff; Gathering of evidence on best practice elsewhere (surveys, etc.); Copyright@IDL-2017

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017 

Surveys to monitor the implementation of GRP and training programmes.

7.2 Research Misconduct and Integrity Issues in a developing country like Bangladesh Progress in science & technology and other aspects have not come without growing pains.

Like the U.S., Australia, Canada, China and many other countries, Bangladesh has had its share of research misconduct scandals. In the early 1990s, some scholars began to express concerns about deviations from academic norms in universities in Bangladesh. By the late 1990s, research journals in Bangladesh became alarmed about ethical problems with published research, especially plagiarism. In 1996, several cases of copying large portions of published papers drew the attention of scientists and the national media. In a developing country, there are some wholesale plagiarism is available who encourage to republishing someone else‘s article under a different name. To prevent those issues need to develop a code of conduct or guideline for research or research approach to combat plagiarism and other types of misconduct. The code also included some rules to protect the rights of authors.

Of course, the situation in most settings is more complex, typically, more than one approach is adopted across institutions and national bodies at the same time, as the same actors perform in different functions. The differing size of countries will also have implications for the approaches adopted. It may be easier or more accepted to have a ‗national system‘ of research integrity governance in smaller countries e.g.

Bangladesh, whereas in bigger countries with very large and powerful institutions and universities it may be more difficult to reach consensus about appropriate approaches to research integrity governance. Yet, the typology IDL - International Digital Library

does serve to illustrate the existing heterogeneity of approaches in both academic and government systems across the continent and beyond, and the need for measures to ensure compatibility.

7.3 Challenges or Barriers of Research Integrity in a Developing Country like Bangladesh The challenge in developing a framework for research integrity governance is that it must be both compatible with diverse legal national contexts, translating globally accepted principles into national policy and practice, and correspond to the fundamental ethical guidelines that scientists and scholars set for themselves. In what follows, the focus will be on the challenges presented by the task of reconciling fundamental (and global) principles with nationally applicable legal and institutional contexts. The guiding thought is to enable flexibility and compatibility of structures in different settings without making compromises with regard to the principles to be upheld.

Promoting the integrity of science systems may face many fundamentally different challenges in developing countries, and in countries in transition or emerging economies (ESF/ORI Science Policy Briefing 30 (2007). Yet, given the increasingly close research collaboration between all these different classes of science systems, there is scope and need to enhance all existing systems: the first step implies identifying and adopting the core elements already present, and which nations and institutions should set as benchmarks for aspirations to improve their current research integrity governance structures.

7.3.1 Research Policy Development: Most of the policies developed by research organizations have focused on defining and investigating 6|P a g e

Copyright@IDL-2017

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017 misconduct. While misconduct is by far the most important issue that needs to be addressed to promote research integrity, other issues also merit attention, such as conflicts of interest, data sharing, authorship, and mentoring of students.

Though developing clear and effective policies on research integrity might seem to be a simple and straightforward task, often it is not. For example, it took the U.S. government more than ten years to finalize a uniform policy on research misconduct, and there is considerable variation in the conflict of interest policies adopted by U.S. universities.

7.3.2 Ensure Accountability and Transparency: It is very much difficult to ensure accountability and transparency in research if the researcher doesn‘t like to be.

Although government can develop a policy to encourage integrity in research but accountability is challenging issues. However, government and other research authority should develop some system e.g. rewards to encourage and e.g. punishment to discourage them to be accountable and transparent. Although it‘s challenging but it could be make possible.

7.3.3 Setting and Maintaining National Mandate: The experience of countries in which a national oversight or governance structure has been developed suggests that there is a need for a clear and authoritative national statement to underpin research integrity governance structures. This can take the form of a charter or of legislative support. In devising such a mandate countries can draw on the experiences of others which have already addressed this element, such as Denmark and Norway. In countries in which no national debates have been held yet, the awareness raising processes referred to in the work of WG1 might aim at building alliances between the scientific communities and the main authorities governing the national science system.

IDL - International Digital Library

7.3.4 Fair and Transparent Processes: It‘s a challenge for making the process fair and transparent. Processes advertised to denounce and to deal with suspected cases of scientific misconduct at both local and national level must be fair and transparent. Otherwise there is a risk that stakeholders will refrain from accepting the authority of and cooperation with the relevant institutional actors. It is critical to strive for a balance between prevention and sanction.

7.3.5 Responsibility for Managing Processes: It‘s the another challenging job is to assign the responsibility for managing the process. Roles and responsibilities for prevention, investigation and imposition of sanctions need to be clearly assigned at both local and/or national level.

7.3.6 Lack of University Oversight Mechanisms for Dealing with Misconduct: Basically, university plays an important role in research aspect, especially in a developing country. They provide reviewing mechanism for dealing with research misconduct etc. But in our country there is a lack of proper oversight or reviewing mechanism for dealing with research misconduct.

7.3.7 Pressure to Publish: Perhaps the most difficult challenge any nation faces concerning research integrity is cultivating a research environment that encourages ethical behavior.

The research environment includes attitudes, traditions, and norms that influence the practice of science. The pressure to produce results has played a significant role in misconduct problems in the U.S., South Korea, Europe, China, and in Bangladesh. In the U.S. and Europe, scientists must produce results and publish in order to obtain (or maintain) research funding. In Bangladesh, performance in research (or lack thereof) can impact many areas including salary, promotion, and social benefits. Even graduate 7|P a g e

Copyright@IDL-2017

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017 students face the pressure to publish, since most universities require that students publish articles as a condition of receiving a PhD. Like China, Bangladesh has taken some steps to reduce the pressure to achieve results. Some universities now emphasize the quality of published research rather than the quantity of research in their evaluations of faculty. This reform, though helpful, can be difficult to achieve because there is a strong tendency to measure scientific performance in terms of the quantity of publications or citation score.

7.3.8 Conflicts of Interest: It is also important to address conflicts of interest pertaining to funding and publication and other important decisions to promote an ethical research environment. U.S. granting agencies have adopted rules to prevent personal relationships between applicants and reviewers from biasing the review process. In Bangladesh, personal relationships have affected government decisions, such as the review of research grants, for many years. Bangladesh has made some headway on this problem by taking steps to promote fairness and transparency in hiring decisions and peer review, but more work may need to be done.

7.3.9 Protecting Whistle-Blowers: Protecting whistle-blowers from retaliation is another important challenge facing Bangladesh and many other countries, including the U.S, China.

Countries with laws protecting whistle-blowers, such as the U.S., the U.K., Canada, the Netherlands and Germany, still have problems with encouraging people to report misconduct and other transgressions in research, because people fear that they will face career-threatening consequences of blowing the whistle, such as being blackballed or developing a reputation as a troublemaker. Many U.S. researchers avoid reporting illegal or unethical activity because they simply want to avoid the hassle of IDL - International Digital Library

testifying in a misconduct inquiry or investigation. Additionally, some universities have institutional norms that encourage people to cover-up or ignore problems to avoid embarrassing the institution. As a result, a large percentage of misconduct that occurs in U.S. research may not be reported. Like the U.S., China and other countries, Bangladesh has also had some difficulties with encouraging whistleblowers to report violations of ethical or legal rules. Lack of legal protections for whistleblowers is one reason why many misconduct investigations in Bangladesh have been based on anonymous tips.

7.3.10 Research Auditing: A step beyond supporting whistle-blowing that institutions can take is to routinely audit research data. Auditing can be more effective at preventing and detecting violations of ethical or legal rules than whistle-blowing, because people often do not report problems that they know about or observe. Auditing can not only uncover major problems, such as misconduct, but it can also expose minor ones, such as errors and irregularities in recording data. Auditing is a common practice in research sponsored by pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies, because the companies want to produce data that regulatory agencies will accept, and problems with the data can cost companies time and money. Auditing is less common in research that is not supported by industry, because auditing costs a significant amount of money, and universities often cannot afford to pay people to audit research. Also, academic researchers may not want to share their research records with an outside party.

8|P a g e

Copyright@IDL-2017

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017 7.4 Opportunities and scope of Research Integrity in a Developing Country In a developing country like Bangladesh only problems, challenges, or barriers will be available it‘s not true all time. There are some potentials or opportunities also available in regard to the research aspects. The following potentials or opportunities might be come.

7.4.1 Promotion of Research on Research Integrity: Prevention of research misconduct is the ultimate goal. In developed country there are lots of research works available of this topic but in developing country like Bangladesh there are not enough such research activities available.

But we have immense opportunities to do so.

Scholarly research is the tool for understanding misconduct and improper research practices and the reasons behind them. Coupled with this is the need to encourage the publication of such studies of both policy issues and scientific behavior. Both research and its literature will facilitate greater attention from relevant stakeholders. To prevent research misconduct, we need to know more about research integrity.

Funding bodies, politicians, academies, universities, ESF, ENRIO, journal editors and researchers themselves should all be involved in promoting studies of research integrity. Many countries may share common values, but local culture and values should also be respected when providing recommendations.

7.4.2 Open Communication: Open communication is also essential for promoting integrity in research. Openness plays a key role in collaboration, publication, peer review, criticism, replication, the evaluation of government projects and industry activities, and in making decisions about social issues, such as global warming, preparing for natural disasters, or food safety. Interference in scientific communication—by the government or private IDL - International Digital Library

industry—can undermine the integrity of science in many different ways. Restrictions on communication may prevent researchers from publishing important results, reporting illegal or unethical activities, conducting some types of controversial research, or engaging in debates about ethical issues. Bangladesh, like China, has taken some steps toward promoting openness in scientific communication in recent years—the internet has provided a useful outlet for discussion and debate—but additional steps may be necessary.

7.4.3 Open Government: Open government also helps to promote research integrity because it involves researchers, scientists and citizens in the country‘s decision-making. Important decisions about science, such as funding priorities and research policies, as well as decisions that are informed by science, such as food and drug safety or environmental protection, should be open for public comment and review. Open government is necessary so that researchers, scientists etc. can take part in the decisions that can affect the country‘s research agenda and the quality and integrity of research. For example, if the government plans to adopt a new policy concerning the use of human subjects in research, scientists and citizens should be informed about the policy and should help to craft it. If the government is considering a plan to shift resources toward an expensive scientific project, such as building a new supercollider, scientists and citizens also need to take part in that decision.

It is sorry to say that, for many years, Bangladesh government was far from open.

Important decisions were made in secret, and the public had little input into government policies.

The government also has kept other countries from learning about events taking place in Bangladesh. Although Bangladesh government

9|P a g e

Copyright@IDL-2017

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017 has become much more open in recent years, it can go further.

7.4.4 Formation of Research Association: There is a great opportunity to form a strong research association consist of government body, university scholars and subject experts from civil societies, who will create a research policy, guideline, rules and regulations, manage the oversight & reviewing system, control the plagiarism, misconduct, data falsification etc.

7.4.5 Promote Academic Ethics: From our school, college and university level we should encourage our students to maintain academic ethics. If we can lean them what is ethics, integrity, misconduct, and its good side and bad side as well as its punishment then we can say our next generation must be aware of research integrity. We can do it easily in our country.

7.4.6 Ensure that Procedures for Investigation are Legally Robust: To prevent research misconduct investigation procedures must be legally robust. Every country should have standardized procedures for reviewing the research work. In Bangladesh there is lots of scholars earned knowledge from developed countries. Therefore, there is an opportunity to utilize their expert knowledge to set and ensure the procedures for investigating the research misconduct etc.

7.4.8 Creating and Using Anti-Plagiarism Software: This is called age of science and technology. We are growing fast in many aspects. Our concern authority should highly emphasize on the research investment. If we can do that we may get high quality research and thus development will be occurred. For that we have to be honest and produce genuine research.

To prevent research misconduct, plagiarism our concern authority should create appropriate antiplagiarism software to catch the illegal one.

There is a great opportunity to do so.

8. RECOMMENDATIONS Integrity should be maintained in every aspects of our life although there are some drawbacks remained. To overcome such challenges or drawbacks the following recommendations might be adopted and followed. 



7.4.7 Decide on levels of Appeal: There is no opportunity for appeal for defense against his/her claims. As in all legal and quasi-legal proceedings, there should be an instance of appeal. There is an opportunity to set permissibility of appeals, the types of appeals, for example concerning either the scientific or the procedural elements of an investigation, and the processes for appeal should be clearly stated in any procedures. If it is established it give us a transparent system in research aspect.

IDL - International Digital Library





10 | P a g e

More emphasis needs to be placed on prevention, so that whatever processes are adopted will be perceived as supportive of a system to ensure good research practice and not as isolated punitive action.

Appropriate authority e.g. government, other research institutes should take a master plan to develop a research policy that must ensure accountability and transparency.

Research body should establish special mechanisms for oversight, review, and manage the whole process so that misconduct might be minimized or removed.

University and/ or other relevant organizations where research practices are welcomed should allocate enough Copyright@IDL-2017

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017





time to produce a quality research work.

If the researchers get relax from ―pressure to publish‖ they must produce a high quality research without doing any research misconduct like plagiarism etc. Or their performance evaluation system should not be on the basis of quantity of paper rather it should be on the basis of quality of paper.

Research Audit should be implemented if possible. Because it is a very good endeavor to avoid research misconduct, plagiarism, falsification, stealing of other works etc.

Moreover, government should be open in this regard. Open communication should be ensured to promote research/ academic ethics. And finally we can recommend that a good & strong legal entity/ body should be established to manage the investigation, appeal, if any, against misconduct.

9. CONCLUSIONS Good research is ultimately based on trust – trust between research colleagues and between academic institutions and industry, and the trust of the public and policy makers in the research community. Without such trust, the research system would quickly flounder. Trust in science and scholarship needs to be a priority for all nations and institutions. The research community needs to be able to apply good research practice and has to be prepared to deal with situations when there are suspicions of misconduct. Waiting for a serious case of misconduct to prompt such action is shortsighted and risks undermining the standing of science in society. Protecting research integrity, IDL - International Digital Library

without stifling research creativity, is a constant learning process. The deliberations of the ESF MO Forum also suggest that there is no ‗one size fits all‘ framework of research integrity governance that can be readily applied across all European countries. Science organizations and research institutions in each country should discuss and develop their own research integrity governance structures, suited to the country‘s size, resources and research infrastructures.

Regardless of the approach adopted in particular countries or institutions, sharing experience is extremely important. It can help to provide easy access to best practice locally, nationally and internationally; the pooling of knowledge and experiences will build up a body of data on the extent of research misconduct and measures to deal with and prevent the phenomenon, locally, nationally, and beyond. Networks offer an invaluable international forum for practitioners to share their experiences and to identify and debate issues around research integrity governance. Other tools for information sharing include the establishment of a web site or other public forum to capture good quality documentation on GRP and guidelines, etc. This could also include presentation of misconduct scenarios as an educational tool for researchers.

In summary, there is a balance to be struck between promotion of GRP and prevention of misconduct on the one hand, and investigation and punishment of misconduct on the other.

10. REFERENCES 1.

11 | P a g e

AMERICAN ASSOCI ATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE (AAAS) and the U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI) (2000). The Role of Activities of Scientific Societies in Promoting Research Integrity. Washington, D.C. Available URL: http://www.aaas.org/ssp/dspp/sfr 1/ projects/integrity, html.

Copyright@IDL-2017

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017

2.

3.

4.

5.

14. FRANKEL, MS (2003): Developing a Knowledge Base on Integrity in Research and Scholarship. Phi Kappa Phi Forum.

83(2): 4649

BOSTON COLLEGE, (2004): Principles on research integrity and misconduct. Boston College http://www.bc.edu/research/rcip/princ

15. FREDA, MC & KEARNEY MH (2005): Ethical issues faced by nursing editors.

Western journal of nursing research. [West J Nurs Res] Jun; 27 (4): 487-499.

BURD, S (2005): Scientists See Big Business on the Offensive: The Chronicle of Higher Education, Past chronicle Issues. http:// chronicle.com/data/articles.dir/art41.dir/issue-16.dir/16a02601 .html CHINN, PL & KRAMER, MK (1991): Theory and Nursing: A systematic approach 3rd. Mosby Year Book. St Louis

7.

CHO M, ET AL. (2000), Policies on Faculty Conflicts of Interest at US Universities. 284:2203–2208.

9.

13. FIORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY (1995): Policy on Misconduct in Research. Academic Affairs Policies and Procedures Manual. http://www.vsu.edu/ugs/regulationsmanual

BOLTON, PA (2002): Scientific Ethics.

BURNS, N & GROVE, SK (1993): The Practice of nursing research: conduct, critique and utilization ended Philadelphia W.B. Saunders.

6.

8.

12. FAWCETT, J (1989): Analysis and Evaluation of conceptual Modules of Nursing ended. F.A Davis Co. Philadelphia

BAILEY, CD; HASSELBACK, JR & KARCHER, JN (2005): Research Misconduct in Accounting Literature: A Survey of the Most Prolific Researchers‘ Actions and Beliefs. ABACUS. 37, (1) 2001

16. FROSMAN, B (1999): An Ethical Analysis of the Phenomenon of Misconduct in Research. Acta Oncologica. 38(1): 107-110 17. GOODSTEIN, DL (2002): Scientific Misconduct: http ://www.aaup.org/publications/Academe/200 2/02JF/02j fgoo. htm.

18. GUENIN, LM (1999): Expressing a consensus on candour. Nature. Vol 402. www.nature.com.

CLARK, E & MC CANN, TV (2005): Researching Students: An Ethical Dilemma.

Nurse researcher. 12 (3), 42-52.

19. HAO, BALTIMORE D. (2008). A Global Perspective on Science and Technology. P.322:544–551. [PubMed]

ESF/ORI SCIENCE POLICY BRIEFING 30 (2007). Research Integrity: global responsibility to foster common standards.

20. INGHAM, JC & HORNER, J (2004): Ethics and Research. The ASHA Leader. March 16.

10. EUROPEAN SCIENCE FOUNDATION (2000). Good scientific practice in research and scholarship

21. IVERSON,M; FRANKEL,M & SIANG, S (2003): Scientific Societies and Research Integrity: What are they doing and How well are They doing it? Science and Engineering Ethics. 9, (2): 41-158.

11. FARTHING, J (1998): An editor‘s response to fraudsters. British Medical Journal.

316(17): 26-33; see www.bmj.com

IDL - International Digital Library

12 | P a g e

Copyright@IDL-2017

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017 22. JEFFERS, B. (2005): Environments That Promote Nursing Research, 54 (1): 63-70.

Research Integrity.

34. SCHULTZ, MD (2000): Promoting integrity through instructions to authors. Office of_Research Integrity. U.S Department of Health and Human Services.

23. KING, AD & ANDERSON (1999): The meaning of research integrity. Journal of the Medical and Dental Association 157(4): 254 272.

35. SHAMOO A, RESNIK D. (2009), Responsible Conduct of Research. 2.

New York: Oxford University Press.

24. MELEIS, AI (1985): Theoretical Nursing: Development and Progress, J.B Lippincott.

Philadelphia.

25. NATAL ACADEMIC PRESS Integrity in scientific research.

36. SHERMAN J (2005): Professional Misconduct, Plagiarism, Ethics, Educational materials. New England Review. 26 (3): 8289.

(1999):

26. NATURE. (2006). Finding Fraud China. P. 441:549–550. [PubMed]

37. SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY, (1995): Policy & Procedures. Policy No. 60.01 in

27. NATURE. (2008). Culture Clash in China.

P.456:545–546. [PubMed]

38. SOUTH AFRICAN SOCIETY FOR NURSING RESEARCH (1996): Ethical standards for nurse researchers. Curationis.

19(1): 74-74.

28. OFFICE OF RESEARCH INTEGRITY (1989): Policy on Research Misconduct: United State Department of Health and Human Services.

39. STENECK, N (2000): Assessing research integrity. Report presented at the ORI conference on research integrity. U.S Department of Health & Human Services.

29. QIU J. (2007). Chinese Law aims to Quell Fear of Failure. Nature. P. 449:12. [PubMed]

40. STENECK, NH (2003): The professional Societies in promoting Integrity in Research.

American Journal of Health Behavior. 27 (3). S239-S247.

30. RESNIK D. (2003), From Baltimore to Bell Labs: Reflections on Two Decades of Debate about Scientific Misconduct.

Accountability in Research. 10:123–135.

41. SWAZEY, J & ANDERSON, MS (1993): Mentors, advisors and role models in graduate and professional education.

Association of academic health centres.

Washington D.C.

31. RESNIK D. (2007). The Price of Truth. New York: Oxford University Press.

42. TITUS S, WELLS J, RHOADES L. (2008).

Repairing Research Integrity. P.453:980– 982. [PubMed]

32. RESNIK D. (2008). Playing Politics with Science. New York: Oxford University Press.

43. UNITED STATES PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES (PHS) (2000): Policy on instructions in the Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) from the office of Research Integrity.

33. ROGERS, BL (1989): concept analysis and the development of nursing knowledge. The evolutionary cycle. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 14: 330-335.

IDL - International Digital Library

13 | P a g e

Copyright@IDL-2017

IDL - International Digital Library Of Technology & Research Volume 1, Issue 5, May 2017

Available at: www.dbpublications.org

International e-Journal For Management And Research-2017 44. UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO, (1998): Misconduct in research and authorship.

University of Colorado System.

Administrative Policy Statement.

45. WALKER, LO & AVANT, KO (1995): Strategies for theory construction in nursing 3rd co. California: Appellon & Laugh 46. WHITBECK, C (2004): Trust and the Future of Research. Physics Today.

November: 48-53; see: http://encyclopedie en.snyke.com/articles/scholarly_method.htm l.

IDL - International Digital Library

14 | P a g e

Copyright@IDL-2017