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 Aug 30;28(5):43.
doi: 10.1007/s11948-022-00390-5.

Stakeholders' Experiences of Research Integrity Support in Universities: A Qualitative Study in Three European Countries

Affiliations

Stakeholders' Experiences of Research Integrity Support in Universities: A Qualitative Study in Three European Countries

Natalie Evans et al. Sci Eng Ethics. .

Abstract

Fostering research integrity (RI) increasingly focuses on normative guidance and supportive measures within institutions. To be successful, the implementation of support should be informed by stakeholders' experiences of RI support. This study aims to explore experiences of RI support in Dutch, Spanish and Croatian universities. In total, 59 stakeholders (Netherlands n = 25, Spain n = 17, Croatia n = 17) participated in 16 focus groups in three European countries. Global themes on RI support experiences were identified by thematic analysis. Themes identified were: 'RI governance and institutional implementation', 'RI roles and structures', 'RI education and supervision', and 'Infrastructure, technology and tools supporting daily practice'. Experiences of support differed between countries in relation to: the efforts to translate norms into practice; the extent to which RI oversight was a responsibility of RE structures, or separate RI structures; and the availability of support close to research practice, such as training, responsible supervision, and adequate tools and infrastructure. The study reinforces the importance of a whole institutional approach to RI, embedded within local jurisdictions, rules, and practices. A whole institutional approach puts the emphasis of responsibility on institutions rather than individual researchers. When such an approach is lacking, some stakeholders look for intervention by authorities, such as funders, outside of the university.

Keywords: Research ethics; Research governance; Research integrity guidelines; Research quality; Responsible conduct of research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Stakeholder consultation meetings and timeline

References

    1. Agency for Science and Higher Education. (2015). Croatian ethical code of the board of ethics in science and higher education. Retrieved June 2017, from https://www.azvo.hr/en/ethics-committee-in-science-and-higher-education.
    1. Anderson MS. Global research integrity in relation to the United States' research-integrity infrastructure. Accountability in Research. 2014;21(1):1–8. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2013.822262. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Anderson MS, Horn AS, 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(9):853–860. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f764c. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Aubert Bonn N, Godecharle S, Dierickx K. European universities’ guidance on research integrity and misconduct: Accessibility, approaches, and content. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. 2017;12(1):33–44. doi: 10.1177/1556264616688980. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ayres L, Kavanaugh K, Knafl KA. Within-case and across-case approaches to qualitative data analysis. Qualitative Health Research. 2003;13(6):871–883. doi: 10.1177/1049732303013006008. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources