Defining and Handling Research Misconduct: A Comparison Between Chinese and European Institutional Policies

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Research institutions are responsible for promoting research integrity and handling allegations of research misconduct. Due to various cultural and social contexts, institutional policies from different cultural backgrounds exhibit many differences, such as their primary concern and mechanisms for dealing with allegations of research misconduct. This comparative study analyses research misconduct policies from 21 Chinese and 22 European universities. The results show that definitions of research misconduct from all retrieved policies go beyond fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism but include different types of questionable research practices. Their procedures for handling research misconduct differ in, for example, confidentiality and disclosure of conflict of interest. Differences can also be found in their governance approaches ("bottom-up" versus "top-down").
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)302-319
Number of pages18
JournalJournal of empirical research on human research ethics
Volume15
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 17 Feb 2021

Keywords

  • Research misconduct
  • Research cultures

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Defining and Handling Research Misconduct: A Comparison Between Chinese and European Institutional Policies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this