Diksha Devara’s Post

These new COPE guidelines underline the importance of collaboration between research institutions and journals in maintaining research and publication integrity. These excellent guidelines offer recommendations on points of contact, information sharing, and communication. They also address potential misconduct involving multiple journals or institutions and the correction of the scholarly record. https://lnkd.in/epiJExQg #researchintegrity #scholarlypublishing #academicpublishing #researchethics #guidelines

🌟 Emphasizing collaboration between research institutions & journals is key for research integrity! New COPE guidelines offer valuable insights on communication, misconduct prevention, & maintaining scholarly record 📚 #ResearchIntegrity #AcademicPublishing

The "7 R's of Research" represent guiding principles that emphasize ethical considerations, quality, and integrity in research. Here’s a breakdown: 1. Relevance: Ensure the research addresses significant and current issues relevant to society or the field of study. 2. Rigor: Use robust methodologies, maintain accuracy, and ensure reproducibility to uphold the quality of research findings. 3. Reliability: Consistently gather dependable data and findings, which can be trusted and verified by others. 4. Responsibility: Conduct research ethically, respecting participants, society, and the environment, and avoid misconduct. 5. Respect: Maintain respect for research subjects, cultural norms, privacy, and intellectual property rights. 6. Reflection: Regularly evaluate and reflect on the purpose, methods, and impacts of the research, considering broader implications. 7. Reporting: Transparently and accurately report findings, methods, limitations, and potential conflicts of interest, making information accessible to others.

Why Do Some Reviewers Ask Authors to Cite Their Own Work? 1- Building Knowledge or Boosting Metrics? In an ideal world, citations are added to enrich a paper's scientific context. However, if a citation request feels unsubstantiated, it raises questions about motivations—does it serve the research or only citation metrics? 2- Potential Bias in Peer Review: The peer review system should assess work on its scientific merit. When reviewers promote their own work without clear relevance, this can undermine the integrity of this process. 3- Academic Integrity: Adding citations to appease reviewers can compromise an author’s work, as they may feel pressured to include sources that don’t align with their research. As a community, let’s advocate for ethical practices in peer review. Authors should be empowered to respectfully question citation requests, and reviewers should be mindful of their influence. Let's focus on advancing knowledge and supporting work on its merit.

Research integrity is the cornerstone of scientific progress. It's disheartening to hear about instances of misconduct, but they underscore the importance of upholding the highest ethical standards in our work. As scientists, let's ensure that integrity remains at the forefront of scientific inquiry. #ResearchIntegrity #EthicsInScience https://lnkd.in/eUNx4pmK

In recent times, we've observed a notable increase in the number of research paper retractions. According to recent studies, 2023 has seen a significant uptick in retractions across various scientific disciplines. This trend highlights both the challenges and the evolving standards in the world of academic research.The reasons for these retractions are varied, ranging from honest errors and methodological flaws to more serious issues such as data manipulation and ethical breaches. While these incidents may cast a shadow on scientific integrity, they also underscore the importance of rigorous peer review and post-publication scrutiny.

In the context of academic research, a diversity of ethical issues, conditioned by the different roles of members within these institutions, arise. Data manipulation for instance to achieve policy-driven outcomes compromises scientific integrity, erodes public trust, and weakens the foundation of evidence-based policy. Such practices risk public harm by promoting policies grounded in biased interpretations. To counteract these issues, the scientific community must reinforce transparency, adhere to strict ethical standards to ensure that research reliably informs public policy for societal benefit and not "something else". This commitment requires not only training in research ethics but also a culture of accountability and openness in which data and findings are freely shared and inspected closely.

When we pursue #ResearchIntegrity, we shall not limit the discourse to methods to detect misconduct. 👍 We shall also be watchful for "honest signals" of commitment to ethical practices. 👌 Good points by Tim Vines & Ben Kaube on The Scholarly Kitchen! 💡 Through recommendations about ethical practices & policies, as well as products, such as #ARPHA #Preprints, ARPHA Conference Abstracts, Advanced Books, the #Nanopublications for #biodiversity, we support our client #journals & their authors demonstrate #researchintegrity & #openscience practices. https://t.co/j2FB0BsX41 #scholarlypublishing #scientific #scholarly #academic #journals #journalpublishing #academicpublishing #publishing #openresearch #opendata #fairdata #research #researchers #science #scientific

CfP - Special Issue on Ethical Leadership in Administrative Sciences (Open Access) We warmly welcome submissions for our Special Issue "Improving Ethical Leadership in its Cultural Context: New Challenges and Prospects" in Administrative Sciences, (Open Access, Impact Factor of 3.0), see for more info: https://lnkd.in/gw8248Ny In this Special Issue, we seek to encourage debate across various disciplines in order to broaden and deepen the interpretations and theorisations of ethical leadership in its cultural context. We are therefore interested in case studies that illuminate cultural contexts, especially from non-Western settings (cf. Van Eeden Jones & Lasthuizen, 2018), alongside studies that employ psychological or quantitative approaches in order to identify and compare how particular contextual factors affect ethical leadership (Eissenbeiß & Brodbeck, 2014), but also studies that explore how ethical leadership is constructed and contested historically, culturally and politically (Eissenbeiß, 2012; Knights & O'Leary, 2006; Liu, 2017). The submission deadline has been extended to 15 October 2024. Manuscript Submission Information The article should be between 5,000–10,000 words and follow the guidelines of the journal. The guidelines and Call For Papers can also be found on the journal website. For further details on the submission process, please see the Instructions for Authors on the journal website (https://lnkd.in/gPNXJySh). All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. A first decision is provided to authors approximately 22 days after submission; acceptance to publication is undertaken in 5 days.That is fast! Fees For authors facing financial constraints, AS is offering discounts of 20% to 50%. If authors require fee waivers, they can email Coraline Chen, Section Managing Editor, MDPI Beijing (Email: [email protected])