Perceived publication pressure and research misconduct: should we be too bothered with a causal relationship?

Research Ethics 18 (4):329-338 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Publication pressure has been touted to promote questionable research practices (QRP) and scientific or research misconduct (RM). However, logically attractively as it is, there is no unequivocal evidence for this notion, and empirical studies have produced conflicting results. Other than difficulties in obtaining unbiased empirical data, a direct causal relationship between perceived publication pressure (PPP) and QRP/RM is inherently difficult to establish, because the former is a complex biopsychosocial construct that is variedly influenced by multiple personal and environmental factors. To effectively address QRP/RM by tackling the sources of PPP would also be difficult because of the competitive nature of the reward and merit system of contemporary science. We might do better with efforts in enhancing knowledge in research ethics and integrity among the practitioners, as well as institutional infrastructures and mechanisms to fairly and efficiently adjudicate cases of QRP/RM.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,038

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Scientific Integrity in Brazil.Liliane Lins & Fernando Martins Carvalho - 2014 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 11 (3):283-287.
Clinical Research Fraud.Jane Barrett - 2006 - Research Ethics 2 (4):136-139.


Added to PP

16 (#908,012)

6 months
10 (#269,579)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?