Differing perceptions concerning research misconduct between China and Flanders: A qualitative study

References

• Adams, D., and K. D. Pimple. 2005. “Research Misconduct and Crime Lessons from Criminal Science on Preventing Misconduct and Promoting Integrity.” Accountability in Research 12 (3): 225–240. doi:10.1080/08989620500217495.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Amos, K. A. 2014. “The Ethics of Scholarly Publishing: Exploring Differences in Plagiarism and Duplicate Publication across Nations.” Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA 102 (2): 87–91. doi:10.3163/1536-5050.102.2.005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ana, J., T. Koehlmoos, R. Smith, and L. L. Yan. 2013. “Research Misconduct in Low- and Middle-income Countries.” PLoS Medicine 10 (3): e1001315. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001315.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, M. S. 2014. “Global Research Integrity in Relation to the United States’ Research-integrity Infrastructure.” Accountability in Research 21 (1): 1–8. doi:10.1080/08989621.2013.822262.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, M. S., A. S. Horn, K. R. Risbey, E. A. Ronning, R. de Vries, and B. C. Martinson. 2007. “What Do Mentoring and Training in the Responsible Conduct of Research Have to Do with Scientists’ Misbehavior? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-funded Scientists.” Academic Medicine 82 (9): 853–860. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e31812f764c.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antes, A. L., X. Wang, M. D. Mumford, R. P. Brown, S. Connelly, and L. D. Devenport. 2010. “Evaluating the Effects that Existing Instruction on Responsible Conduct of Research Has on Ethical Decision Making.” Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges 85 (3): 519. doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181cd1cc5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atmanspacher, H., and G. J. Dalenoort, eds. 2012. Inside versus Outside: Endo-and Exo-concepts of Observation and Knowledge in Physics, Philosophy and Cognitive Science. Vol. 63. Springer Berlin Heidelberg..
   Google Scholar
• Aubert Bonn, N., and W. Pinxten. 2019. “A Decade of Empirical Research on Research Integrity: What Have We (Not) Looked At?” Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics 14 (4): 338–352. doi:10.1177/1556264619858534.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bosch, X. 2010. “Safeguarding Good Scientific Practice in Europe.” EMBO Reports 11 (4): 252–257. doi:10.1038/embor.2010.32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buljan, I., L. Barac, and A. Marusic. 2018. “How Researchers Perceive Research Misconduct in Biomedicine and How They Would Prevent It: A Qualitative Study in A Small Scientific Community.” Accountability in Research 25 (4): 220–238. doi:10.1080/08989621.2018.1463162.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Casadevall, A., and F. C. Fang. 2012. “Reforming Science: Methodological and Cultural Reforms.” Infection and Immunity 80 (3): 891–896. doi:10.1128/IAI.06183-11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng, C.-Y. 1976. “Model of Causality in Chinese Philosophy: A Comparative Study.” Philosophy East & West 26 (1): 3–20. doi:10.2307/1397903.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cyranoski, D. 2004. “Korea’s Stem-cell Stars Dogged by Suspicion of Ethical Breach.” Nature 429 (6987): 3. doi:10.1038/429003a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cyranoski, D. 2018. “China Introduces Sweeping Reforms to Crack down on Academic Misconduct.” Nature 558 (7709): 171–172. doi:10.1038/d41586-018-05359-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dai, Q. 2003. “Informed Consent in China: Status Quo and Its Future.” Medical Law International 6 (1): 53–71. doi:10.1177/096853320300600104.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Davis, M. S. 2003. “The Role of Culture in Research Misconduct.” Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance 10 (3): 189–201. doi:10.1080/714906092.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Davis, M. S., M. Riske-Morris, and S. R. Diaz. 2007. “Causal Factors Implicated in Research Misconduct: Evidence from ORI Case Files.” Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (4): 395–414. doi:10.1007/s11948-007-9045-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elo, S., and K. Helvi. 2008. “The Qualitative Content Analysis Process.” Journal of Advanced Nursing 62 (1): 107–115. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fanelli, D. 2009. “How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Survey Data.” PLoS One 4 (5): e5738. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005738.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fanelli, D., R. Costas, and V. Lariviere. 2015. “Misconduct Policies, Academic Culture and Career Stage, Not Gender or Pressures to Publish, Affect Scientific Integrity.” PLoS One 10 (6): e0127556. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0127556.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, F. C., R. Grant Steen, and A. Casadevall. 2012. “Misconduct Accounts for the Majority of Retracted Scientific Publications.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109 (42): 17028–17033. doi:10.1073/pnas.1212247109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godecharle, S., B. Nemery, and K. Dierickx. 2013. “Guidance on Research Integrity: No Union in Europe.” The Lancet 381 (9872): 1097–1098. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)60759-x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godecharle, S., B. Nemery, and K. Dierickx. 2014. “Heterogeneity in European Research Integrity Guidance: Relying on Values or Norms?” Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics 9 (3): 79–90. doi:10.1177/1556264614540594.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godecharle, S., B. Nemery, and K. Dierickx. 2018. “Differing Perceptions Concerning Research Integrity between Universities and Industry: A Qualitative Study.” Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (5): 1421–1436. doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9965-4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gow, S. 2014. “A Cultural Bridge for Academic Integrity? Mainland Chinese Master’s Graduates of UK Institutions Returning to China.” International Journal for Educational Integrity 10: 1. doi:10.21913/IJEI.v10i1.935.
   Google Scholar
• Gunsalus, C. K., and A. D. Robinson. 2018. “Nine Pitfalls of Research Misconduct.” Nature 557: 297–299. doi:10.1038/d41586-018-05145-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hesselmann, F. 2019. “Science and Its Others: Examining the Discourse about Scientific Misconduct through a Postcolonial Lens.” Identities 26 (4): 393–411. doi:10.1080/1070289X.2018.1538065.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horbach, S. P. J. M., and W. Halffman. 2017. “Promoting Virtue or Punishing Fraud: Mapping Contrasts in the Language of ‘Scientific Integrity’.” Science and Engineering Ethics 23 (6): 1461–1485. doi:10.1007/s11948-016-9858-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu, G., and J. Lei. 2015. “Chinese University Students’ Perceptions of Plagiarism.” Ethics & Behavior 25 (3): 233–255. doi:10.1080/10508422.2014.923313.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KU Leuven), n.d. Central lecture research integrity for starting PhD researchers. https://www.kuleuven.be/english/research/integrity/training/phdlecture
   Google Scholar
• Kim, L. 2008. “Explaining the Hwang Scandal: National Scientific Culture and Its Global Relevance.” Science as Culture 17 (4): 397–415. doi:10.1080/09505430802515023.
   Google Scholar
• Kisamore, J. L., T. H. Stone, and I. M. Jawahar. 2007. “Academic Integrity: The Relationship between Individual and Situational Factors on Misconduct Contemplations.” Journal of Business Ethics 75 (4): 381–394. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9260-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lancet. 2019. “Research Integrity: Time for Global Action.” Lancet 394 (10213): 1965. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32933-2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrence, P. A. 2003. “The Politics of Publication.” Nature 422 (6929): 259–261. doi:10.1038/422259a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, C. S., and A. Schrank. 2010. “Incubating Innovation or Cultivating Corruption? The Developmental State and the Life Sciences in Asia.” Social Forces 88 (3): 1231–1256. doi:10.1353/sof.0.0282.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. J. M., P. J. D. Drenth, and E. Noort. 2012. Flawed Science: The Fraudulent Research Practices of Social Psychologist Diederik Stapel. Tilburg, The Netherlands: Commissioned by the Tilburg University, University of Amsterdam and the University of Groningen.
   Google Scholar
• Li, D., and G. Cornelis. 2018. “How Do Researchers Perceive Research Misbehaviors? A Transcultural Case Study of Chinese and Flemish Researchers.” Accountability in Research 25 (6): 350–369. doi:10.1080/08989621.2018.1507824.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liao, Q., Y. Zhang, Y. Fan, M. Zheng, Y. Bai, G. D. Eslick, X. He, S. Zhang, H. H.-X. Xia, and H. Hua. 2017. “Perceptions of Chinese Biomedical Researchers Towards Academic Misconduct: A Comparison between 2015 and 2010.” Science and Engineering Ethics 24: 629–645. doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9913-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, D. 2005. “Plagiarism in ESOL Students: Is Cultural Conditioning Truly the Major Culprit?” ELT Journal 59 (3): 234–241. doi:10.1093/elt/cci043.
   Google Scholar
• Macfarlane, B., J. Zhang, and A. Pun. 2012. “Academic Integrity: A Review of the Literature.” Studies in Higher Education 39 (2): 339–358. doi:10.1080/03075079.2012.709495.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Macfarlane, B., and Y. Saitoh. 2008. “Research Ethics in Japanese Higher Education: Faculty Attitudes and Cultural Mediation.” Journal of Academic Ethics 6 (3): 181–195. doi:10.1007/s10805-008-9065-9.
   Google Scholar
• Martinson, B. C., M. S. Anderson, and D. V. Raymond. 2005. “Scientists Behaving Badly.” Nature 435: 737–738. doi:10.1038/435737a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meyer, W. M., and G. M. Jr Bernier. 2002. “Potential Cultural Factors in Scientific Misconduct Allegations..” In Investigating Research Integrity: Proceedings of the First ORI Research Conference on Research Integrity. Edited by Steneck, N.H. and Scheetz M.D.. 163-166. Rockville, MD: Office of Research Integrity.
   Google Scholar
• National Academy of Sciences. 2002. Integrity in Scientific Research: Creating an Environment that Promotes Responsible Conduct. Washington, DC: NAS.
   Google Scholar
• Nie, J.-B. 2001. “Is Informed Consent Not Applicable in China? Intellectual Flaws of The” Cultural Difference Argument.” Formosan Journal of Medical Humanities 2 (1–2): 67–74. doi:10.30097/FJMH.200110.0008.
   Google Scholar
• Olesen, A. P., L. Amin, and Z. Mahadi. 2017. “Malaysian Researchers Talk about the Influence of Culture on Research Misconduct in Higher Learning Institutions.” Accountability in Research 24 (8): 469–482. doi:10.1080/08989621.2017.1399358.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olesen, A. P., L. Amin, and Z. Mahadi. 2018. “In Their Own Words: Research Misconduct from the Perspective of Researchers in Malaysian Universities.” Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (6): 1755–1776. doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9997-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redman, B. K., and A. L. Caplan. 2017. “Improving Research Misconduct Policies.” EMBO Reports 18 (4): 511–514. doi:10.15252/embr.201744110.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. 2011. “What Is Ethics in Research and Why Is It Important?” Retrieved August 6, 2020 from https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/resources/bioethics/whatis/index.cfm?links=false .
   Google Scholar
• Resnik, D. B. 2014. “Does RCR Education Make Students More Ethical, and Is This the Right Question to Ask?” Accountability in Research 21 (4): 211–217. doi:10.1080/08989621.2013.848800.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seckinelgin, H., and H. Shinoda. ed. 2001. Ethics and International Relations. Springer . Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Sovacool, B. K. 2008. “Exploring Scientific Misconduct: Isolated Individuals, Impure Institutions, or an Inevitable Idiom of Modern Science?” Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 5 (4): 271–282. doi:10.1007/s11673-008-9113-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steneck, N. H. 2006. “Fostering Integrity in Research: Definitions, Current Knowledge, and Future Directions.” Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (1): 53–74. doi:10.1007/PL00022268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steneck, N. H. 2013. “Global Research Integrity Training.” Science 340 (6132): 552–553. doi:10.1126/science.1236373.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steneck, N. H., and R. E. Bulger. 2007. “The History, Purpose, and Future of Instruction in the Responsible Conduct of Research.” Academic Medicine 82 (9): 829–834. doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e31812f7d4d.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun, P. 2017. “世界科研诚信建设的动向及其对我国的启示.” The trend of global research integrity construction and its enlightenment to China.” ????national Defense Science and Technology 38: 6.
   Google Scholar
• Tang, L. 2019. “Five Ways China Must Cultivate Research Integrity.” Nature 575 (7784): 589–591. doi:10.1038/d41586-019-03613-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tavare, A. 2011. “Managing Research Misconduct: Is Anyone Getting It Right?” BMJ 343 (dec28 2): d8212. doi:10.1136/bmj.d8212.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• The Chinese Communist Party and the State Council. 2018. “Several Recommendations on Further Strengthening the Integrity of Scientific Research.” [in Chinese]. http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/2018-05/30/content_5294886.htm
   Google Scholar
• The Chinese Communist Party and the State Council. 2019. “Recommendations on Further Promoting the Spirit of Scientists, and Strengthening Conduct in Work and Study.” [in Chinese]. http://www.xinhuanet.com/politics/2019-06/11/c_1124609190.htm
   Google Scholar
• The Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation. 2013. “National Systems for Handling Cases of Research Misconduct. Report Based on a Survey Conducted in the Fall of 2012 with 15 Respondents from Various Countries.” http://www.enrio.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/National_systems_for_handling_cases_on_research_misconduct.pdf
   Google Scholar
• the Flemish Committee for Scientific Integrity. n.d.: http://www.vcwi.be
   Google Scholar
• Tijdink, J. K., L. M. Bouter, C. L. S. Veldkamp, P. M. van de Ven, J. M. Wicherts, and Y. M. Smulders. 2016. “Personality Traits are Associated with Research Misbehavior in Dutch Scientists: A Cross-sectional Study.” PloS One 11 (9). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0163251.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Universiteit Gent (UGent). n.d.“Introduction Day for New PhD Students” https://www.ugent.be/doctoralschools/en/doctoraltraining/courses/transferableskills/all/2019-2020-introduction-day.htm
   Google Scholar
• Vlaams Instituut voor Biotechnologie (VIB). 2019. “Belgian Researchers Commit to More Transparency about Animal Testing.”. http://www.vib.be/en/news/Pages/Belgian-researchers-commit-to-more-transparency-about-animal-testing.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB). n.d.. https://www.vub.be/en/research/legal-ethics-office#training-&-eventsFlandersTraining Network for Methodology and Statistics (FLAMES) https://www.flames-statistics.com
   Google Scholar
• Watts, L. L., K. E. Medeiros, T. J. Mulhearn, L. M. Steele, S. Connelly, and M. D. Mumford. 2016. “Are Ethics Training Programs Improving? A Meta-Analytic Review of past and Present Ethics Instruction in the Sciences.” Ethics & Behavior 27 (5): 351–384. doi:10.1080/10508422.2016.1182025.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xin, H. 2006. “Scandals Shake Chinese Science.” Science 312 (5779): 1464–1466. doi:10.1126/science.312.5779.1464.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yi, N., B. Nemery, and K. Dierickx. 2019. “Perceptions of Research Integrity and the Chinese Situation: In-depth Interviews with Chinese Biomedical Researchers in Europe.” Accountability in Research 26 (7): 405–426. doi:10.1080/08989621.2019.1652096.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeng, W., and D. Resnik. 2010. “Research Integrity in China: Problems and Prospects.” Developing World Bioethics 10 (3): 164–171. doi:10.1111/j.1471-8847.2009.00263.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao, Y., and D. Deng. 2012. “科技工作者如何看学术不端行为——问卷调查的结果” China science and technology personnel’s views on academic misconduct: A survey result of 30,000 science and technology personnel. 科研管理.” Science Research Management 33 (8): 90–97.
   Google Scholar