Calls have been made for improving transparency in conducting and reporting research, improving work climates, and preventing detrimental research practices. To assess attitudes and practices regarding these topics, we sent a survey to authors, reviewers, and editors. We received 3,659 (4.9%) responses out of 74,749 delivered emails. We found no significant differences between authors’, reviewers’, and editors’ attitudes towards transparency in conducting and reporting research, or towards their perceptions of work climates. Undeserved authorship was perceived by all groups as the most prevalent detrimental research practice, while fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and not citing prior relevant research, were seen as more prevalent by editors than authors or reviewers. Overall, 20% of respondents admitted sacrificing the quality of their publications for quantity, and 14% reported that funders interfered in their study design or reporting. While survey respondents came from 126 different countries, due to the survey’s overall low response rate our results might not necessarily be generalizable. Nevertheless, results indicate that greater involvement of all stakeholders is needed to align actual practices with current recommendations.
MULTIFILE
In light of increasing calls for transparent reporting of research and prevention of detrimental research practices, we conducted a cross-sectional machine-assisted analysis of a representative sample of scientific journals' instructions to authors (ItAs) across all disciplines. We investigated addressing of 19 topics related to transparency in reporting and research integrity. Only three topics were addressed in more than one third of ItAs: conflicts of interest, plagiarism, and the type of peer review the journal employs. Health and Life Sciences journals, journals published by medium or large publishers, and journals registered in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) were more likely to address many of the analysed topics, while Arts & Humanities journals were least likely to do so. Despite the recent calls for transparency and integrity in research, our analysis shows that most scientific journals need to update their ItAs to align them with practices which prevent detrimental research practices and ensure transparent reporting of research.
MULTIFILE
The integrated use of technologies in learning in formal education and training in The Netherlands is far from realized, and there is still a long way to go to reach that goal. But what are the views of students and early career teachers about learning with technologies? This chapter focuses on Dutch research into the expectations and experiences of students and early career teachers as to their views of learning with technologies in education and training. A survey was conducted online, followed by focus group interviews among all groups studied. The most important findings of the research are being presented here. Special attention is given to the use of mobile technologies and the Internet, social networking sites and gaming, bullying, spam and plagiarism, homework and learning, technologies in schools and in learning, motivation of students and the role of teachers.
LINK
![Prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in The Netherlands [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]](https://publinova-harvester-content-acc.s3.amazonaws.com/thumbnails/files/previews/pdf/20240409024830789928.f5_0352_4033_99e3_b9d3476cb04f_110664_gowri_gopalakrishn-thumbnail-400x300.png)
