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 May 15;15(1):177.
doi: 10.1186/s13104-022-06065-5.

Improving research integrity: a framework for responsible science communication

Affiliations

Improving research integrity: a framework for responsible science communication

Ilinca I Ciubotariu et al. BMC Res Notes. .

Abstract

Research integrity, an essential precept of scientific inquiry and discovery, comprises norms such as Rigor, Reproducibility, and Responsibility (the 3R's). Over the past decades, numerous issues have arisen that challenge the reliability of scientific studies, including irreproducibility crises, lack of good scientific principles, and erroneous communications, which have impacted the public's trust in science and its findings. Here, we highlight one important component of research integrity that is often overlooked in the discussion of proposals for improving research quality and promoting robust research; one that spans from the lab bench to the dissemination of scientific work: responsible science communication. We briefly outline the role of education and institutions of higher education in teaching the tenets of good scientific practice and within that, the importance of adequate communications training. In that context, we present our framework of responsible science communication that we live by and teach to our students in courses and workshops that are part of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health R3 Center for Innovation in Science Education.

Keywords: Institutional graduate education programs; Research integrity; Responsibility; Rigor; Scientific communications training.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Responsible Science Communication Framework. This framework applies value-based recommendations on ethical research conduct to practical science communication

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Ioannidis JPA. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2005;2(8):e124. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fang FC, Steen RG, Casadevall A. Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012;109(42):17028–17033. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1212247109. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Casadevall A, Fang FC. Rigorous science: a how-to guide. mBio. 2016;7(6):e01902–e01916. doi: 10.1128/mBio.01902-16. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Casadevall A, Ellis LM, Davies EW, McFall-Ngai M, Fang FC. A framework for improving the quality of research in the biological sciences. mBio. 2016;7(4):e01256–16. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Flier JS. Irreproducibility of published bioscience research: diagnosis, pathogenesis and therapy. Mol Metab. 2016;6(1):2–9. doi: 10.1016/j.molmet.2016.11.006. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources