Accountability in research · 2026
Leadership to strengthen research culture and foster responsible conduct of research: A case study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lacey Seán, Ricken Jean, Cassidy Stephen
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Research performing organizations (RPOs) are increasingly expected to strengthen research culture and support the responsible conduct of research (RCR). Institutional supports are central to advancing research culture across RPOs. To inform development and evaluation of these supports, surveys were conducted within an RPO.
METHOD: Perceptions of research culture and RCR were examined using surveys conducted in 2022 and 2024. Between surveys, accessible training and supports on good research practices were developed and deployed.
RESULTS: Awareness of research impact, authorship, and collegial support remained high (p > 0.05), with significant improvements in access to resources and reporting pathways for inappropriate research behaviors (p < 0.05). In contrast, time for professional development remained low. Knowledge of access to research supports improved significantly for open access, data management, and authorship (p < 0.05). Participation in targeted training was associated with improved domain-specific knowledge of research integrity, authorship, reporting mechanisms, and acess to resources (p < 0.05). Open-ended responses reflected a parallel shift: in 2022, participants emphasized obstacles, but by 2024, focus moved toward training, resources, and constructive practices, suggesting an evolving culture shaped by institutional supports.
CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that leadership in developing and deploying accessible training and supports contributed to strengthened awareness of RCR and institutional support mechanisms.
METHOD: Perceptions of research culture and RCR were examined using surveys conducted in 2022 and 2024. Between surveys, accessible training and supports on good research practices were developed and deployed.
RESULTS: Awareness of research impact, authorship, and collegial support remained high (p > 0.05), with significant improvements in access to resources and reporting pathways for inappropriate research behaviors (p < 0.05). In contrast, time for professional development remained low. Knowledge of access to research supports improved significantly for open access, data management, and authorship (p < 0.05). Participation in targeted training was associated with improved domain-specific knowledge of research integrity, authorship, reporting mechanisms, and acess to resources (p < 0.05). Open-ended responses reflected a parallel shift: in 2022, participants emphasized obstacles, but by 2024, focus moved toward training, resources, and constructive practices, suggesting an evolving culture shaped by institutional supports.
CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that leadership in developing and deploying accessible training and supports contributed to strengthened awareness of RCR and institutional support mechanisms.