What Explains Associations of Researchers' Nation of Origin and Scores on a Measure of Professional Decision-Making? Exploring Key Variables and Interpretation of Scores
- PMID: 30604356
- PMCID: PMC6606404
- DOI: 10.1007/s11948-018-0077-6
What Explains Associations of Researchers' Nation of Origin and Scores on a Measure of Professional Decision-Making? Exploring Key Variables and Interpretation of Scores
Abstract
Researchers encounter challenges that require making complex professional decisions. Strategies such as seeking help and anticipating consequences support decision-making in these situations. Existing evidence on a measure of professional decision-making in research (the PDR) that assesses the use of decision-making strategies revealed that NIH-funded researchers born outside of the U.S. tended to score below their U.S. counterparts. To examine potential explanations for this association, this study recruited 101 researchers born in the United States and 102 born internationally to complete the PDR and measures of basic personal values, values in scientific work, discrimination between the seriousness of rules in research, exposure to unprofessional research practices, and acculturation to American culture. Several variables were associated with PDR scores-discrimination between types of rules in research, exposure to unprofessional research practices, acculturation, and the basic personal values of power, security, and benevolence. However, only security, benevolence, acculturation, and rule discrimination were also associated with nation of origin. In multivariate models, the variance explained by these variables in accounting for the association of nation of origin and PDR scores was somewhat overlapping, thus, only security and benevolence remained as unique, statistically significant predictors. Thus, this study identified some important variables in the association of nation of origin and PDR, but more research is needed. In a secondary analysis to examine the "clinical significance" (the practical importance) of scores on the PDR, this study examined aggregated PDR score data from the present sample and past samples of investigators. This analysis identified scores that may suggest a concern versus those scores that may be interpreted as excellent, proficient, or marginal. Implications for training and mentoring, along with considerations for future research are discussed.
Keywords: Culture; Decision-making; Nation of origin; Professionalism.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Similar articles
-
Professional Decision-Making in Research (PDR): The Validity of a New Measure.Sci Eng Ethics. 2016 Apr;22(2):391-416. doi: 10.1007/s11948-015-9667-8. Epub 2015 Jun 14. Sci Eng Ethics. 2016. PMID: 26071940 Free PMC article.
-
Making Professional Decisions in Research: Measurement and Key Predictors.Account Res. 2016;23(5):288-308. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2016.1171149. Account Res. 2016. PMID: 27093003 Free PMC article.
-
The Role of Culture and Acculturation in Researchers' Perceptions of Rules in Science.Sci Eng Ethics. 2018 Apr;24(2):361-391. doi: 10.1007/s11948-017-9876-4. Epub 2017 Mar 20. Sci Eng Ethics. 2018. PMID: 28321685 Free PMC article.
-
Healthcare practitioners' personal and professional values.Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2016 May;21(2):257-86. doi: 10.1007/s10459-015-9626-9. Epub 2015 Jul 28. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2016. PMID: 26215664 Review.
-
What drives and inhibits researchers to share and use open research data? A systematic literature review to analyze factors influencing open research data adoption.PLoS One. 2020 Sep 18;15(9):e0239283. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239283. eCollection 2020. PLoS One. 2020. PMID: 32946521 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Professional decision-making in medicine: Development of a new measure and preliminary evidence of validity.PLoS One. 2020 Feb 7;15(2):e0228450. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228450. eCollection 2020. PLoS One. 2020. PMID: 32032394 Free PMC article.
-
Assessing the climate for research ethics in labs: Development and validation of a brief measure.Account Res. 2022 Jan;29(1):2-17. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2021.1881891. Epub 2021 Feb 4. Account Res. 2022. PMID: 33517782 Free PMC article.
-
Seeking help as a strategy for ethical and professional decision-making in research: Perspectives of researchers from East Asia and the United States.Account Res. 2025 Aug;32(6):963-985. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2024.2360945. Epub 2024 Jun 3. Account Res. 2025. PMID: 38828607 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Adams J (2013). The fourth age of research. Nature, 497(7451), 557–560. - PubMed
-
- Anderson MS, Horn AS, Risbey KR, Ronning EA, De Vries R, & Martinson BC (2007). 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, 82(9), 853–860, doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f764c. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Anderson MS, & Louis KS (1994). The graduate student experience and subscription to the norms of science. Research in Higher Education, 35(3), 273–299.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous