Abstract
AbstractThis article reviews educational efforts to promote a responsible conduct of research (RCR) that were reported in scientific publications between 1990 and early 2020. Unlike previous reviews that were exploratory in nature, this review aimed to test eleven hypotheses on effective training strategies. The achievement of different learning outcomes was analyzed independently using moderator analysis and meta-regression, whereby 75 effect sizes from 30 studies were considered. The analysis shows that the achievement of different learning outcomes ought to be investigated separately. The attainment of knowledge strongly benefited from individualized learning, as well as from the discussion and practical application of ethical standards. Contrarily, not covering ethical standards tended to be a feature of successful courses, when looking at other learning outcomes. Overall, experiential learning approaches where learners were emotionally involved in thinking about how to deal with problems were most effective. Primarily intellectual deliberation about ethical problems, often considered the “gold standard” of ethics education, was significantly less effective. Several findings from previous reviews, e.g., the preferability of mono-disciplinary groups, could not be replicated with multivariate analysis. Several avenues for future research efforts are suggested to advance knowledge on the effectiveness of research integrity training.
Funder
Horizon 2020 Framework Programme
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Developmental and Educational Psychology
Reference35 articles.
1. ALLEA. (2017). The European code of conduct for research integrity (rev. ed.). All European Academies.
2. Andorno, R., Katsarov, J., & Rossi, S. (2019). Results of mapping of current practice. Public report of the H2020 project INTEGRITY. Retrieved in May 2021 from https://h2020integrity.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/D3.2-Results-of-mapping-current-practice.pdf.
3. Antes, A. L. (2014). A systematic approach to instruction in research ethics. Accountability in Research, 21(1), 50–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2013.822269.
4. Antes, A. L., & DuBois, J. M. (2014). Aligning objectives and assessment in responsible conduct of research instruction. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education, 15(2), 108–116. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v15i2.852.
5. Antes, A. L., Murphy, S. T., Waples, E. P., Mumford, M. D., Brown, R. P., Connelly, S., & Devenport, L. D. (2009). A meta-analysis of ethics instruction effectiveness in the sciences. Ethics & Behavior, 19(5), 379–402. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508420903035380.
Cited by
34 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献