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
. 2022 Mar 16;17(3):e0265392.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265392. eCollection 2022.

Reliability and validation of an attitude scale regarding responsible conduct in research

Samar Abd ElHafeez  1 , Mohamed Salem  2 , Henry J Silverman  3
Affiliations

Reliability and validation of an attitude scale regarding responsible conduct in research

Samar Abd ElHafeez et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Background: Several studies reveal a problematic prevalence of research misbehaviors. There are several potential causes of research misconduct but ensuring that scientists hold attitudes that reflect norms of acceptable behaviors is fundamental.

Aim: Our aim was to evaluate the psychometric properties (factor structure and reliability) of an "attitude" scale that we adopted from a questionnaire we previously used to investigate the prevalence of research misbehaviors in the Middle East.

Methods: We used data from participants (n = 254) who were involved in our prior questionnaire study to determine the validity of an attitude scale that we adapted from this previous study. We performed exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to determine the factor structure of the attitude scale followed by measures of convergent and concurrent validity. We assessed reliability by computing the Cronbach's alphas of each construct of the attitude scale.

Results: EFA indicated that the attitude scale consists of two factors (constructs). Convergent validity was demonstrated by significant correlations of item-item and item-total. Correlation analysis revealed that the attitude constructs were significantly correlated with the Research Misbehavior Severity Score, thereby demonstrating concurrent validity. Cronbach's alphas were greater than 0.75 for both constructs.

Conclusion: We demonstrated a valid and reliable 20-item attitude scale with two factors related to "acceptability of practices in responsible conduct in research" and "general attitudes regarding scientific misconduct". The use of a validated attitude scale can help assess the effectiveness of educational programs that focus on participants acquiring attitudes that are instrumental in responsible conduct in research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Scree plot for determining the numbers of factors extracted.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Correlation between the scores of the “attitudes toward the acceptability of RCR practices” and the Research Misconduct Severity Score.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Correlation between the scores of the “general attitudes toward scientific misconduct” and the Research Misconduct Severity Score.
Fig 4
Fig 4. Correlation between the scores of the combined attitude scale and the Research Misconduct Severity Score.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Fanelli D. How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data. PLoSOne. 2009;4. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005738 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Martinson BC, Anderson MS, de Vries R. Scientists behaving badly. Nature. 2005;435:737–48. doi: 10.1038/435737a - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pryor ER, Habermann B, Broome ME. Scientific misconduct from the perspective of research coordinators: a national survey. J Med Ethics. 2007;33(6):365–9. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.016394 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Roberts DL, St John FA. Estimating the prevalence of researcher misconduct: a study of UK academics within biological sciences. PeerJ. 2014;2:e562. doi: 10.7717/peerj.562 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dhingra D, Mishra D. Publication misconduct among medical professionals in India. Indian J Med Ethics. 2014;11(2):104–7. doi: 10.20529/IJME.2014.026 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types