Background

Concerns about research misbehavior in academic science have sparked interest in the factors that may explain research misbehavior. Often three clusters of factors are distinguished: individual factors, climate factors and publication factors. Our research question was: to what extent can individual, climate and publication factors explain the variance in frequently perceived research misbehaviors?

Methods

From May 2017 until July 2017, we conducted a survey study among academic researchers in Amsterdam. The survey included three measurement instruments that we previously reported individual results of and here we integrate these findings.

Results

One thousand two hundred ninety-eight researchers completed the survey (response rate: 17%). Results showed that individual, climate and publication factors combined explained 34% of variance in perceived frequency of research misbehavior. Individual factors explained 7%, climate factors explained 22% and publication factors 16%.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that the perceptions of the research climate play a substantial role in explaining variance in research misbehavior. This suggests that efforts to improve departmental norms might have a salutary effect on behavior.

中文翻译：

---

解释感知的研究不良行为中的差异：阿姆斯特丹学术研究人员的一项调查结果

背景

对学术科学中研究不当行为的担忧引起了人们对可能解释研究不当行为的因素的兴趣。通常将三类因素区分开：个人因素，气候因素和出版因素。我们的研究问题是：个人，气候和出版因素在多大程度上可以解释经常被认为是研究不端行为的差异？

方法

从2017年5月到2017年7月，我们在阿姆斯特丹的学术研究人员中进行了一项调查研究。该调查包括三种测量工具，我们之前曾报告过这些测量结果，在这里我们将这些发现进行了整合。

结果

1,298名研究人员完成了调查（答复率：17％）。结果表明，个人因素，气候因素和出版因素共同解释了研究不良行为发生频率中34％的方差。个体因素解释为7％，气候因素解释为22％，出版因素解释为16％。

结论

我们的结果表明，研究气氛的感知在解释研究行为异常中起着重要作用。这表明，改进部门规范的努力可能会对行为产生有益的影响。