Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2015 Oct;21(5):1085-93.
doi: 10.1007/s11948-014-9594-0. Epub 2014 Sep 26.

Standards of Scientific Conduct: Disciplinary Differences

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Standards of Scientific Conduct: Disciplinary Differences

Michael Kalichman et al. Sci Eng Ethics. 2015 Oct.

Abstract

Teaching of responsible conduct of research is largely predicated on the assumption that there are accepted standards of conduct that can be taught. However there is little evidence of consensus in the scientific community about such standards, at least for the practices of authorship, collaboration, and data management. To assess whether such differences in standards are based on disciplinary differences, a survey, described previously, addressing standards, practices, and perceptions about teaching and learning was distributed in November 2010 to US faculty from 50 graduate programs for the biomedical disciplines of microbiology, neuroscience, nursing, and psychology. Despite evidence of statistically significant differences across the four disciplines, actual differences were quite small. Stricter measures of effect size indicated practically significant disciplinary differences for fewer than 10% of the questions. This suggests that the variation in individual standards of practice within each discipline is at least as great as variation due to differences among disciplines. Therefore, the need for discipline-specific training may not be as important as sometimes thought.

Keywords: Authorship; Collaboration; Data management; Research ethics; Responsible conduct of research; Standards.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. AAMC. Women in U.S. Academic Medicine and Science: Statistics and Benchmarking Report 2011-2012. [December 23, 2013];Table 3: Distribution of full-time faculty by department, rank, and gender, 2012. 2012 https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Women%20in%20U%20S%20%20Academic%20....
    1. American Association of Colleges of Nursing. [December 23, 2013];Effective Strategies for Increasing Diversity in Nursing Programs. 2001 http://www.aacn.nche.edu/aacn-publications/issue-bulletin/effective-stra....
    1. American Psychological Association. 2012 Graduate Study in Psychology. [December 23, 2013];Faculty in U S and Canadian Graduate Departments of Psychology: 2010-2011. 2012 http://www.apa.org/workforce/publications/12-grad-study.
    1. Anderson MS, Horn A, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, Martinson BC. What do mentoring and training in the responsible conduct of research have to do with scientists’ misbehavior? Findings from a national survey of NIH-funded scientists. Academic Medicine. 2007;82:853–860. - PubMed
    1. Becher T, Trowler P. Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Cultures of Disciplines. 2. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press; 2001.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources