A Taxonomy for Research Integrity Training: Design, Conduct, and Improvements in Research Integrity Courses
-
Published:2023-04-25
Issue:3
Volume:29
Page:
-
ISSN:1353-3452
-
Container-title:Science and Engineering Ethics
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Sci Eng Ethics
Author:
van den Hoven MariëtteORCID, Lindemann TomORCID, Zollitsch LindaORCID, Prieß-Buchheit JuliaORCID
Abstract
AbstractTrainers often use information from previous learning sessions to design or redesign a course. Although universities conducted numerous research integrity training in the past decades, information on what works and what does not work in research integrity training are still scattered. The latest meta-reviews offer trainers some information about effective teaching and learning activities. Yet they lack information to determine which activities are plausible for specific target groups and learning outcomes and thus do not support course design decisions in the best possible manner. This article wants to change this status quo and outlines an easy-to-use taxonomy for research integrity training based on Kirkpatrick’s four levels of evaluation to foster mutual exchange and improve research integrity course design. By describing the taxonomy for research integrity training (TRIT) in detail and outlining three European projects, their intended training effects before the project started, their learning outcomes, teaching and learning activities, and their assessment instruments, this article introduces a unified approach. This article gives practitioners references to identify didactical interrelations and impacts and (knowledge) gaps in how to (re-)design an RI course. The suggested taxonomy is easy to use and enables an increase in tailored and evidence-based (re-)designs of research integrity training.
Funder
European Union Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Management of Technology and Innovation,Health Policy,Issues, ethics and legal aspects,Health (social science)
Reference48 articles.
1. Abdi, S., Fieuws, S., Nemery, B., & Dierickx, K. (2021). Do we achieve anything by teaching research integrity to starting Ph.D. students? Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8(1), 1–7. 2. All European Academies (ALLEA). (2017). The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. Revised Edition. Berlin. Retrieved September 9, 2021, from https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/horizon/guidance/european-code-of-conduct-for-research-integrity_horizon_en.pdf 3. Antes, A. L., Brown, R. P., Murphy, S. T., Waples, E. P., Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., & Devenport, L. D. (2007). Personality and ethical decision-making in research: The role of perceptions of self and others. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: An International Journal, 2(4), 15–34. 4. 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, 379–402. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508420903035380 5. Antes, A., Wang, L., Xiaoqian, M., Mumford, M., Brown, R., Connelly, S., & Devenport, L. (2010). Evaluating the effects that existing instruction on responsible conduct of research has on ethical decision making. Academic Medicine, 85(3), 519–526. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181cd1cc5
Cited by
6 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
|
|