IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v49y2022i2p246-266..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Education and training policies for research integrity: Insights from a focus group study
[Research Integrity is Much More than Misconduct]

Author

Listed:
  • Krishma Labib
  • Natalie Evans
  • Rea Roje
  • Panagiotis Kavouras
  • Andrea Reyes Elizondo
  • Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner
  • Ivan Buljan
  • Tine Ravn
  • Guy Widdershoven
  • Lex Bouter
  • Costas Charitidis
  • Mads P Sørensen
  • Joeri Tijdink

Abstract

Education is important for fostering research integrity (RI). Although RI training is increasingly provided, there is little knowledge on how research stakeholders view institutional RI education and training policies. Following a constructivist approach, we present insights about research stakeholders’ views and experiences regarding how research institutions can develop and implement RI education and training policies. We conducted thirty focus groups, engaging 147 participants in eight European countries. Using a mixed deductive-inductive thematic analysis, we identified five themes: (1) RI education should be available to all; (2) education and training approaches and goals should be tailored; (3) motivating trainees is essential; (4) both formal and informal educational formats are necessary; and (5) institutions should take into account various individual, institutional, and system-of-science factors when implementing RI education. Our findings suggest that institutions should make RI education attractive for all and tailor training to disciplinary-specific contexts.

Suggested Citation

  • Krishma Labib & Natalie Evans & Rea Roje & Panagiotis Kavouras & Andrea Reyes Elizondo & Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner & Ivan Buljan & Tine Ravn & Guy Widdershoven & Lex Bouter & Costas Charitidis & Mads P S, 2022. "Education and training policies for research integrity: Insights from a focus group study [Research Integrity is Much More than Misconduct]," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(2), pages 246-266.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:49:y:2022:i:2:p:246-266.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scab077
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:oup:scippl:v:49:y:2022:i:2:p:246-266.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.