Mismatch in perceptions of the quality of supervision and research data management as an area of concern: Results from a university-wide survey of the research integrity culture at a Belgian university

ABSTRACT

Researchers of KU Leuven, a large Belgian university, were invited to complete a bespoke questionnaire assessing their attitudes toward research integrity and the local research culture, with specific emphasis on the supervision of junior researchers. A total of 7,353 invitations were sent via e-mail and 1,866 responses were collected (25.3% response rate), of which 1,723 responses are reported upon here. Some of the findings are relevant to the broader research community. Whereas supervisors evaluated their supervision of junior researchers almost unanimously as positive, fewer supervisees evaluated it as such. Data management emerged as an area of concern, both in terms of reviewing raw data and of data storage. More female than male professors emphasized open communication and supported their supervisees’ professional development and personal well-being. At the same time, fewer female professors felt safe to speak up than male professors. Finally, researchers who obtained their master’s degree outside Europe evaluated their supervision and KU Leuven’s research culture more positively than researchers with a master’s degree from KU Leuven. The results of the survey were fed back to the university’s board and several bodies and served as input to update the university’s research policy. Faculties and departments received a detailed report.

KEYWORDS:

• Research integrity
• research culture
• survey
• supervision
• data management

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude toward the following people for their assistance, feedback and input throughout various phases of the study: Jaak Billiet, John Creemers, Lut Crijns, Nele De Cuyper, Ortwin de Graef, Lies De Groef, Jan De Houwer, Sara Decoster, Kathleen Freson, Ludo Froyen, Marie-Christine Janssens, Pleuntje Jellema, Jan-Baptist Lemaire, Christian Maes, Peter Marynen, Walter Schaeken, Marc Swyngedouw, Liesbet Van der Perre, Sabine Van Doorslaer, Joos Vandewalle, Inti Vanmechelen, Sofie Verheyden, Lena Vos, and Sara Willems. The input from policy makers of all levels, from the rector to departmental councils, is highly valued. The authors also thank all the respondents and all the individuals that supported the project.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2024.2318245

Credit statement

Steven De Peuter: Conceptualization, investigation, methodology, project administration, writing – original draft, writing – review & editing; Gert Storms: Conceptualization, methodology, supervision, writing – review & editing; Kris Dierickx: Conceptualization, methodology, supervision, writing – review & editing; Martin Meganck: Conceptualization, methodology, supervision, writing – review & editing; Inge Lerouge: Conceptualization, methodology, supervision, writing – review & editing; Wouter Vandevelde: Conceptualization, methodology, supervision, writing – review & editing.

Notes

1. In their historical review of the concepts of climate and culture in organizational research, Benjamin et al. (2013, 361) defined culture as “the basic assumptions about the world and the values that guide life in organizations” and climate as “the meanings people attach to interrelated bundles of experiences they have at work.” Currently, however, both terms are often used interchangeably. Also see Valkenburg et al. (2021) for an advanced discussion of culture versus practice.

2. For “integration staff” the appointment rate of 50% of more was maintained. Integration staff includes all statutory staff that were employed in the academic study programs of the university colleges which were integrated as KU Leuven staff member since October 1st, 2013 – mainly teaching staff.

3. For a list of academic ranks in Belgium and a comparison with other countries, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_academic_ranks#Belgium

4. For most questions, this means that research associates, PhD students and postdoctoral researchers were combined into the “junior researchers” category and all professors were combined into the “senior researchers” category. For the questions about Supervision and Mentoring, however, postdoctoral researchers who were supervising other researchers were assigned to either category based on whether they completed the questionnaire as supervisee or supervisor.

5. A small number of respondents (39) completed the majority of the questions but dropped out at the question asking what KU Leuven could “do to improve the integrity of your own and your group’s research” (i.e., Question 45), their responses have been included.

6. Professors who indicated not to supervise other researchers were not shown the questions about supervision. Postdocs who did not supervise other researchers were included as supervisees. Postdocs who supervised other researchers were able to choose in which role they wanted to take the parts of the questionnaire containing different questions for supervisors and supervisees.

7. As one example, being digital natives, junior researchers are often more knowledgeable than more senior researchers about cloud-based solutions that can support open science, large-scale collaboration and sharing of data.

8. Of course, we fully acknowledge that gender is a continuum and that male supervisors also provide emotional support, just as (some) female supervisors may be distant and/or unavailable. As reported by Antes et al. (2019), open communication and support are central to the conduct of “research exemplars,” irrespective of gender.

9. We also cannot exclude the possibility that responsible supervisors selectively completed the questionnaire whereas supervisors who fall short did not, and that in particular dissatisfied supervisees responded whereas happy supervisees (of responsible supervisors who completed the questionnaire) did not. We consider this to be unlikely, although, as stated, not impossible.

10. Likewise, the HR department offers trainings in leadership, managing a lab, etc (Resnik et al. 2023).

Additional information

Funding

The PRICe project was funded by Internal Funds KU Leuven.