IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v80y2017icp73-81.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How prevalent is academic misconduct in management research?

Author

Listed:
  • Hopp, Christian
  • Hoover, Gary A.

Abstract

We survey 1215 management researchers, including editors, researchers, and reviewers, about their views and experiences with four types of academic misconduct: plagiarism, self-plagiarism, coercive citations, and questionable reviewing practices. Management researchers hold strict views on plagiarism, though editors report on frequent instances encountered. We find that many management researchers consider self-plagiarism acceptable. There is also a high percentage of editors who report on authors being coerced to add citations of reviewers or journals to their submission. Similarly prevalent is so-called “honorary authorship,” where colleagues and supervisors who did not take part in the work are added as co-authors. Lastly, nearly half of the editors who responded report having witnessed conflicts of interest in peer reviewing. We conclude that the current system of peer reviewing is in need of change, and we discuss possible ramifications to overcome the persistence of academic misconduct.

Suggested Citation

  • Hopp, Christian & Hoover, Gary A., 2017. "How prevalent is academic misconduct in management research?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 73-81.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:80:y:2017:i:c:p:73-81
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.07.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296317302242
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.07.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ben Jann, 2008. "Multinomial goodness-of-fit: Large-sample tests with survey design correction and exact tests for small samples," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 8(2), pages 147-169, June.
    2. Tsui, Anne S. & Lewin, Arie Y. & Schminke, Marshall & Ambrose, Maureen, 2014. "Retraction statement for ‘Ethics and Integrity of the Publishing Process: Myths, Facts, and a Roadmap’ by Marshall Schminke and Maureen L. Ambrose," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 157-162, March.
    3. K. D. Sinclair & S. A. Corr & C. G. Gutierrez & P. A. Fisher & J.-H. Lee & A. J. Rathbone & I. Choi & K. H. S. Campbell & D. S. Gardner, 2016. "Healthy ageing of cloned sheep," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 7(1), pages 1-10, November.
    4. Gary A. Hoover, 2004. "Whose Line Is It? Plagiarism in Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(2), pages 487-493, June.
    5. Anne S. Tsui & Arie Y. Lewin & Marshall Schminke & Maureen Ambrose, 2014. "Retraction statement for ‘Ethics and Integrity of the Publishing Process: Myths, Facts, and a Roadmap’ by Marshall Schminke and Maureen L. Ambrose," Management and Organization Review, The International Association for Chinese Management Research, vol. 10(1), pages 157-162, March.
    6. In-Uck Park & Mike W. Peacey & Marcus R. Munafò, 2014. "Modelling the effects of subjective and objective decision making in scientific peer review," Nature, Nature, vol. 506(7486), pages 93-96, February.
    7. Benson Honig & Joseph Lampel & Donald Siegel & Paul Drnevich, 2014. "Ethics in the Production and Dissemination of Management Research: Institutional Failure or Individual Fallibility?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 118-142, January.
    8. Woodside, Arch G., 2009. "Journal and author impact metrics: An editorial," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 1-4, January.
    9. Schminke, Marshall & Ambrose, Maureen L., 2011. "RETRACTED - Ethics and Integrity in the Publishing Process: Myths, Facts, and a Roadmap," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 397-406, November.
    10. Gary Hoover, 2006. "A Game-Theoretic Model of Plagiarism," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 34(4), pages 449-454, December.
    11. Walter Enders & Gary Hoover, 2006. "Plagiarism in the Economics Profession: A Survey," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(5), pages 92-107.
    12. N/A, 2015. "Retraction Notice," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 29(2), pages 194-194, May.
    13. Daniel G. Arce & Walter Enders & Gary A. Hoover, 2008. "Plagiarism And Its Impact On The Economics Profession," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 231-243, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fong, Eric A. & Patnayakuni, Ravi & Wilhite, Allen W., 2023. "Accommodating coercion: Authors, editors, and citations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(5).
    2. Hamilton, Daniel George & Fraser, Hannah & Hoekstra, Rink & Fidler, Fiona, 2020. "Journal policies and editors’ opinions on peer review," MetaArXiv qkjy4, Center for Open Science.
    3. Anna Abalkina, 2021. "Detecting a network of hijacked journals by its archive," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 7123-7148, August.
    4. Wilhite, Allen & Fong, Eric A. & Wilhite, Seth, 2019. "The influence of editorial decisions and the academic network on self-citations and journal impact factors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1513-1522.
    5. S. P. J. M. Horbach & W. Halffman, 2019. "The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(1), pages 339-373, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mohan, Vijay, 2019. "On the use of blockchain-based mechanisms to tackle academic misconduct," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    2. Necker, Sarah, 2014. "Scientific misbehavior in economics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 1747-1759.
    3. Bruce Lewis & Jonathan Duchac & S. Douglas Beets, 2011. "An Academic Publisher’s Response to Plagiarism," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 489-506, September.
    4. Daniel G. Arce & Walter Enders & Gary A. Hoover, 2008. "Plagiarism And Its Impact On The Economics Profession," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 231-243, July.
    5. Gary Hoover, 2006. "A Game-Theoretic Model of Plagiarism," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 34(4), pages 449-454, December.
    6. Cox, Adam & Craig, Russell & Tourish, Dennis, 2018. "Retraction statements and research malpractice in economics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 924-935.
    7. Horbach, S.P.J.M.(Serge) & Halffman, W.(Willem), 2019. "The extent and causes of academic text recycling or ‘self-plagiarism’," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 492-502.
    8. Altug Yalcintas & Isil Sirin Selcuk, 2016. "Research Ethics Education in Economics," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 74(1), pages 53-74, March.
    9. João Ricardo Faria & Damien Besancenot & Andreas J. Novak, 2011. "Paradigm Depletion, Knowledge Production And Research Effort: Considering Thomas Kuhn'S Ideas," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(4), pages 587-604, November.
    10. Joao R. Faria & Damien Besancenot & Andréas J. Novak, 2009. "Paradigm depletion, knowledge production and research effort," CEPN Working Papers halshs-00447302, HAL.
    11. Garret Christensen & Edward Miguel, 2018. "Transparency, Reproducibility, and the Credibility of Economics Research," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 56(3), pages 920-980, September.
    12. Shaoxiong (Brian) Xu & Guangwei Hu, 2018. "Retraction Notices: Who Authored Them?," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-18, January.
    13. Nicola Lacetera & Lorenzo Zirulia, 2011. "The Economics of Scientific Misconduct," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(3), pages 568-603.
    14. Haeussler, Carolin & Jiang, Lin & Thursby, Jerry & Thursby, Marie, 2014. "Specific and general information sharing among competing academic researchers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 465-475.
    15. Karpov, Alexander, 2016. "Evolutionary Justification of Plagiarism," MPRA Paper 70976, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Aurora A.C. Teixeira & Mariana Fontes da Costa, 2010. "Who rules the ruler? On the misconduct of Journal Editors," OBEGEF Working Papers 005, OBEGEF - Observatório de Economia e Gestão de Fraude;OBEGEF Working Papers on Fraud and Corruption.
    17. Khezr, Peyman & Mohan, Vijay, 2022. "The vexing but persistent problem of authorship misconduct in research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    18. Gary A. Hoover & Christian Hopp, 2017. "What Crisis? Taking Stock of Management Researchers' Experiences with and Views of Scholarly Misconduct," CESifo Working Paper Series 6611, CESifo.
    19. Carolin Haeussler & Lin Jiang & Jerry Thursby & Marie C. Thursby, 2009. "Specific and General Information Sharing Among Academic Scientists," NBER Working Papers 15315, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Sjoerd Beugelsdijk & Arjen Witteloostuijn & Klaus E. Meyer, 2020. "A new approach to data access and research transparency (DART)," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 51(6), pages 887-905, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Publication ethics; Plagiarism; Peer review system;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K30 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - General
    • A11 - General Economics and Teaching - - General Economics - - - Role of Economics; Role of Economists

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:80:y:2017:i:c:p:73-81. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.