Supplementary material - tables
Table S1. Survey studies excluded from a meta-analysis and reasons of exclusion
/ Study ID / reason of exclusion /1 / Alt-White and Pranulis 2006 / does not report on research misconduct /
2 / Anderson et al. 1994 / no data on prevalence, same data used in Martinson 2006 /
3 / Anderson et al. 2007 / no data on prevalence /
4 / Anderson et al. 2007 / no data on prevalence /
5 / Arda 2012 / no data on prevalence /
6 / Bekkelund et al. 1995 / in norweigan /
7 / Beute et al. 2008 / sample consists of students /
8 / Borkowski and Welsh 1998 / perceived prevalence, assessment of ethical quality /
9 / Borkowski and Welsh 2000 / perceived prevalence, assessment of ethical quality /
10 / Braxton and Bayer 1996 / no data on prevalence /
11 / Brock et al. 2009 / does not distinguish between different forms of misconduct /
12 / Broome et al. 2005 / no original data /
13 / Broome et al. 2010 / sample consist of the reviewers /
14 / Brown and Kalichman 1998 / no data on prevalence /
15 / Cossette 2004 / perceived frequency, included for causes /
16 / Dick et al. 2001 / sample consists of students /
17 / Emanuel et al. 1998 / not a questionnaire /
18 / Enders and Hoovers 2004 / sample not consisted of researchers /
19 / Enders and Hoovers 2006 / no data on prevalence /
20 / Eret and Gokmenoglu 2010 / presents data in format not usable for this review /
21 / Fain and Gillespie 1990 / no data on prevalence /
22 / Fiack and Wagner 2008 / no original data /
23 / Freda and Kearney 2005 / sample does not consist of researchers /
24 / Gardner et al. 2005 / no data on P, only FF /
25 / Glick 1993 / no data on P, only FF /
26 / Glick 1994 / no data on P, only FF /
27 / Goldberg and Greenberg 1993 / no original data /
28 / Grincevičienė and Grincevičienė 2007 / imprecise method /
29 / Habermann et al. 2010 / no data on P, only FF /
30 / Hals and Jacobsen 1993 / no original data /
31 / Hals and Jacobsen 1994 / no original data /
32 / Jacobsen and Hals 1995 / does not distinguish different forms of misconduct /
33 / Korenman and Viosca 1993 / does not distinguish different forms of misconduct /
34 / List et al. 2001 / does not distinguish P from other forms of misconduct /
35 / Lock 1988 / imprecise method /
36 / Martinson et al. 2006 / no original data /
37 / Mason et al. 1990 / perceived prevalence /
38 / McKay et al. 2007 / perceived prevalence /
39 / Meyer and McMahon 2004 / misconduct not related to P /
40 / Pancrazio and Aloia 1992 / does not distinguish different forms of misconduct, includes academic and scientific misconduct /
41 / Penzel 2000 / sample consists of students /
42 / Poon and Ainudin 2011 / perceived prevalence /
43 / Price et al. 2001 / no data on prevalence, not even on perceived prevalence, only perception of ethical concerns /
44 / Pryor et al. 2007 / perceived prevalence, first hand knowledge only for misconduct (FFP), included for causes /
45 / Rankin and Esteves 1997 / perceived prevalence, included for causes /
46 / Ranstam et al. 2000 / misconduct not related to P, included for causes /
47 / Riordan and Marlin 1987 / no data on prevalence /
48 / Riordan et al. 1988 / no original data /
49 / Rose 2008 / sample does not consist of researchers (clinical research associates) /
50 / Simmons et al. 1991 / does not distinguish different forms of fraud /
51 / Vuckovic-Dekic et al. 2011 / does not distinguish different forms of misconduct, includes academic and scientific misconduct /
52 / Wager et al. 2009 / sample consists of editors /
53 / Wenger et al. 1999 / perceived prevalence /
54 / Wester et al. 2010 / no data on prevalence /
55 / Yank and Barnes 2002 / no data on prevalence /
Abbreviations: P = plagiarism; FF = data fabrication/falsification
References:
1. Alt-White, A. C., & Pranulis, M. F. (2006). Addressing Nurses' Ethical Concerns About Research in Critical Care Settings. Nursing Administration Quarterly Ethics/Integrity and Trust, 30(1), 67-75.
2. Anderson, M. S., Louis, K. S., Earle, J. (1994). Disciplinary and departmental effects on observations of faculty and graduate student misconduct. The Journal Of Higher Education, 65(3), 331-350.
3. Anderson, M. S., Risbey, K. R., Ronning, E. A., & De Vries, R., Martinson, B.C. (2007). What do mentoring and training in the responsible conduct of research have to do with scientists' misbehaviour? Findings from a National Survey of NIH-funded scientists. Academic Medicine, 82(9), 853-860.
4. Anderson, M. S., Martinson., B. C., & De Vries R. (2007). Normative dissonance in science: Results from a national survey of US scientists. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 2(4), 3-14.
5. Arda, B. (2012). Publication Ethics from the Perspective of PhD Students of Health Sciences: A Limited Experience. Science and Engineering Ethics. 18(2), 213-222.
6. Bekkelund, S. I., Hegstad, A. C., & Førde O.H. (1995). [Scientific misconduct and medical research in Norway]. Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening 115(25): 3148-3151.
7. Beute, N., van Aswegen, E. S., & Winberg, C. (2008). Avoiding Plagiarism in Contexts of Development and Change. IEEE Transactions on Education, 51(2), 201-205.
8. Borkowski, S. C., & Welsh, M. J. (1998). Ethics and the Accounting Publishing Process: Author, Reviewers, and Editor Issues. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(16), 1785-1803.
9. Borkowski, S. C., & Welsh, M. J. (2000). Ethical practice in the accounting publishing process: contrasting opinions of authors and editors. Journal of Business Ethics, 25, 15-31.
10. Braxton, J. M., & Bayer, A. E. (1996). Personal experiences of research misconduct and the response of individual academic scientists. Science, Technology & Human Values, 21(2), 198-213.
11. Brock, G. W., Whiting, J.B., Matern, B., & Fife, S.T. (2009). Integrity of the Marriage and Family Therapy Research Literature: Perceptions and Recommendations. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 35(2), 248-252.
12. Broome, M., Pryor, E., Habermann, B., Pulley, L., & Kincaid, H. (2005). The Scientific Misconduct Questionnaire—Revised (SMQ-R): Validation and Psychometric Testing. Accountability in Research: Policies & Quality Assurance, 12(4), 263-280.
13. Broome, M., Dougherty, M. C., Freda, M.C., Kearney, M.H., & Baggs, J.G. (2010). Ethical concerns of nursing reviewers: An international survey. Nursing Ethics, 17(6), 741-748.
14. Brown, S., & Kalichman, M. W. (1998). Effects of training in the responsible conduct of research: a survey of graduate students in experimental sciences. Science Engineering Ethics, 4(4), 487-498.
15. Cossette, P. (2004). Research integrity: An exploratory survey of administrative science faculties. Journal of Business Ethics, 49(3), 213-234.
16. Dick, M., Sheard, J., & Markham, S. (2001). Is it okay to cheat? - The views of postgraduate students. Proceedings of the 6th annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, doi:10.1145/377435.377474
17. Emanuel, E. J., Patterson, W. B., & Rennie, D. (1998). Scientific misconduct in cancer clinical trials. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 16(10), 3433-3438.
18. Enders, W., & Hoover, E. (2006). Plagiarism in the Economics Profession: A Survey. Challenge, 49(5), 92-107.
19. Enders, W., & Hoover, E. (2004). Whose line is it? Plagiarism in economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 42(2), 487-493.
20. Eret, E., & Gokmenoglu, T. (2010). Plagiarism in higher education: A case study with prospective academicians. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 3303-3307.
21. Fain, G. S., & Gillespie, K. A. (1990). Professional Ethics and Intellectual Property-A National Study. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 61(3), 88-95.
22. Fiack, S., & Wagner, L. (2008). Journal Editors' Views On Publication Ethics: Results Of An International Survey. Poster presentation at the 16th Cochrane Colloquium: Evidence in the era of globalisation; 2008 Oct 3-7; Freiburg, Germany [abstract]. Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen, 102(Suppl VI), 46.
23. Freda, M. C. & Kearney, M. H. (2005). Ethical issues faced by nursing editors. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 27(4), 487-499.
24. Gardner, W., Lidz, C. W., & Hartwig, K. C. (2005). Authors' reports about research integrity problems in clinical trials. Contemporary Clinical Trials, 26(2), 244-251.
25. Glick, J. L. (1993). Perceptions concerning research integrity and the practice of data audit in the biotechnology industry. Accountability in Research, 3(2-3), 187-195.
26. Glick JL, S. A. (1994). Results of a survey on research practices, completed by attendees at the third conference on research policies and quality assurance. Accountability in Research, 3(4), 275-280.
27. Goldberg, L. A. & Greenberg, M. R. (1993). Ethical issues for industrial hygienists: Survey results and suggestions. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 54(3), 127-134.
28. Grincevičienė, V., & Grincevičienė, Š. (2007). Doktorantų Požiūris Į Akademinį Nesąžiningumą. (Lithuanian). Attitude Of Phd Students Towards Academic Dishonesty. (English) Coactivity / Santalka,15(2), 10-20.
29. Habermann, B., Broome, M., Pryor, E. R., & Ziner, K. W. (2010). Research coordinators' experiences with scientific misconduct and research integrity. Nursing Research, 59(1), 51-57.
30. Hals, A., & Jacobsen, G. (1993). [Dishonesty in medical research. A questionnaire study among project administrators in Health Region 4]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen, 113(25), 3149-3152.
31. Hals, A., & Jacobsen, G. (1994). [Misconduct in medical research. A questionnaire survey among project leaders in health region 4]. Nord Med, 109(3), 85-88.
32. Jacobsen, G., & Hals, A. (1995). Medical Investigators Views About Ethics And Fraud In Medical-Research. Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London, 29(5), 405-409.
33. Korenman, S. G., & Viosca, S. P. (1993). Scientist And Trainee Experience In Research Integrity. Clinical Research, 41(2), A289-A289.
34. List, J. A., Bailey, C. D., Euzent, P. J., & Martin, T. L. (2001). Academic economists behaving badly? A survey on three areas of unethical behavior. Economic Inquiry, 39(1), 162-170.
35. Lock, S. (1988). Misconduct in medical research: does it exist in Britain? BMJ, 297(6662): 1531-1535.
36. Martinson, B. C., Anderson, M. S., Crain, A. L., & Vries, R. D. (2006). Scientists' Perceptions of Organizational Justice and Self-Reported Misbehaviors. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: An International Journal, 1(1), 51-66.
37. Mason, J., Bearden, W., & Richardson, L. (1990). Perceived conduct and professional ethics among marketing faculty. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 18(3), 185-197.
38. McKay, R. B. K., Linda A., Kling, J. A. (2007). Faculty ethics from the perspective of college of business administrators. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 10(1), 105-124
39. Meyer, M. J., & McMahon, D. (2004). An Examination of Ethical Research Conduct by Experienced and Novice Accounting Academics. Issues in Accounting Education, 19(4), 413-442.
40. Pancrazio, S. B., & Aloia, (1992). G. F. Evaluating University Policies on Plagiarism and Other Forms of Research Misconduct. Annual Meeting of the North Central Association--Commission on Institutions of Higher Education, Chicago, IL.
41. Penzel, W. R. (2000). Perceptions, attitudes, and rates of cheating in doctoral psychology and law students (PhD thesis): Hofstra University, US.
42. Poon, J., M. L. & Ainuddin, R. A. (2011). Selected Ethical Issues in the Analysis and Reporting of Research: Survey of Business School Faculty in Malaysia. Journal of Academic Ethics, 9, 307-302.
43. Price, J. H., Dake, J. A., & Islam, R. (2001). Selected ethical issues in research and publication: Perceptions of health education faculty. Health Education & Behavior, 28(1), 51-64.
44. Pryor, E. R., Habermann, B., & Broome, M. E. (2007). Scientific misconduct from the perspective of research coordinators: a national survey. Journal of Medical Ethics, 33(6), 365-369
45. Rankin, M., & Esteves, M. D. (1997). Perceptions of scientific misconduct in nursing. Nursing Research 46(5), 270-276.
46. Ranstam, J., Buyse, M., George, S. L., Evans, S., Geller, N. L., Scherrer, B., et al. (2000). Fraud in medical research: An international survey of biostatisticians. Controlled Clinical Trials, 21(5), 415-427.
47. Riordan, C. A., & Marlin, N. A. (1987). Some good news about some bad practices. American Psychologist 42(1), 104-106.
48. Riordan, C. A., Marlin, N. A., & Gidwani, C. (1988). Accounts offered for unethical research practices: Effects on the evaluations of acts and actors. The Journal of Social Psychology, 128(4), 495-505.
49. Rose, L. L. (2008). Scientific misconduct: Perceptions, beliefs, working environments, and reporting practices in the clinical research associate population (PhD thesis): Capella University, US.
50. Simmons, R. L., Polk Jr, H. C., Williams, B., & Mavroudis, C. (1991). Misconduct and fraud in research: Social and legislative issues symposium of the Society of University Surgeons. Surgery, 110(1), 1-7.
51. Vučković-Dekić, L., Gavrilović, D., Kezić, I., Bogdanović, G., & Brkić, S. (2011). Science Ethics Education Part I. Perception and attitude toward scientific fraud among medical researchers. Journal of Balkan Union of Oncology, 16, 771-777.
52. Wager, E., Fiack, S., Graf, C., Robinson, A., & Rowlands, I. (2009). Science journal editors' views on publication ethics: results of an international survey. Journal of Medical Ethics, 35(6), 348-353.
53. Wenger, N. S., Korenman, S. G., Berk, R., & Liu, H. H. (1999). Reporting unethical research behavior. Evaluation Review, 23(5), 553-570.
54. Wester, K. L., Willse, J. T., & Davis, M. S. (2010). Psychological Climate, Stress, and Research Integrity Among Research Counselor Educators: A Preliminary Study. Counselor Education & Supervision, 50(1), 39.
55. Yank, V., & Barnes, D. (2003). Consensus and contention regarding redundant publications in clinical research: Cross-sectional survey of editors and authors. Journal of Medical Ethics, 29(2), 109-114.
Table S2. Questions asked in self and non-self reports regarding plagiarism