11 found
Order:
Disambiguations
Joeri Tijdink [8]Joeri K. Tijdink [3]
  1.  5
    Ranking Major and Minor Research Misbehaviors: Results From a Survey Among Participants of Four World Conferences on Research Integrity.Gerben ter Riet, Brian C. Martinson, Nils Axelsen, Joeri Tijdink & Lex M. Bouter - 2016 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 1 (1).
    BackgroundCodes of conduct mainly focus on research misconduct that takes the form of fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism. However, at the aggregate level, lesser forms of research misbehavior may be more important due to their much higher prevalence. Little is known about what the most frequent research misbehaviors are and what their impact is if they occur.MethodsA survey was conducted among 1353 attendees of international research integrity conferences. They were asked to score 60 research misbehaviors according to their views on and (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  2.  2
    Researchers’ Perceptions of Research Misbehaviours: A Mixed Methods Study Among Academic Researchers in Amsterdam.Lex M. Bouter, Gerben ter Riet, Guy Widdershoven, H. Roeline Pasman, Joeri K. Tijdink & Tamarinde L. Haven - 2019 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 4 (1).
    BackgroundThere is increasing evidence that research misbehaviour is common, especially the minor forms. Previous studies on research misbehaviour primarily focused on biomedical and social sciences, and evidence from natural sciences and humanities is scarce. We investigated what academic researchers in Amsterdam perceived to be detrimental research misbehaviours in their respective disciplinary fields.MethodsWe used an explanatory sequential mixed methods design. First, survey participants from four disciplinary fields rated perceived frequency and impact of research misbehaviours from a list of 60. We then (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  3.  3
    Personally Perceived Publication Pressure: Revising the Publication Pressure Questionnaire by Using Work Stress Models.Frans Jeroen Oort, Joeri K. Tijdink, Marije Esther Evalien de Goede & Tamarinde L. Haven - 2019 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 4 (1).
    BackgroundThe emphasis on impact factors and the quantity of publications intensifies competition between researchers. This competition was traditionally considered an incentive to produce high-quality work, but there are unwanted side-effects of this competition like publication pressure. To measure the effect of publication pressure on researchers, the Publication Pressure Questionnaire was developed. Upon using the PPQ, some issues came to light that motivated a revision.MethodWe constructed two new subscales based on work stress models using the facet method. We administered the revised (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  4.  6
    Practices for Research Integrity Promotion in Research Performing Organisations and Research Funding Organisations: A Scoping Review.Rea Ščepanović, Krishma Labib, Ivan Buljan, Joeri Tijdink & Ana Marušić - 2021 - Science and Engineering Ethics 27 (1):1-20.
    Research integrity is a continuously developing concept, and increasing emphasis is put on creating RI promotion practices. This study aimed to map the existing RI guidance documents at research performing organisations and research funding organisations. A search of bibliographic databases and grey literature sources was performed, and retrieved documents were screened for eligibility. The search of bibliographical databases and reference lists of selected articles identified a total of 92 documents while the search of grey literature sources identified 118 documents for (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5.  5
    Making Researchers Responsible: Attributions of Responsibility and Ambiguous Notions of Culture in Research Codes of Conduct.Govert Valkenburg, Guus Dix, Joeri Tijdink & Sarah de Rijcke - 2020 - BMC Medical Ethics 21 (1):1-13.
    Background Research codes of conduct offer guidance to researchers with respect to which values should be realized in research practices, how these values are to be realized, and what the respective responsibilities of the individual and the institution are in this. However, the question of how the responsibilities are to be divided between the individual and the institution has hitherto received little attention. We therefore performed an analysis of research codes of conduct to investigate how responsibilities are positioned as individual (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  6.  4
    Researchers’ Perceptions of a Responsible Research Climate: A Multi Focus Group Study.Tamarinde Haven, H. Roeline Pasman, Guy Widdershoven, Lex Bouter & Joeri Tijdink - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (6):3017-3036.
    The research climate plays a key role in fostering integrity in research. However, little is known about what constitutes a responsible research climate. We investigated academic researchers’ perceptions on this through focus group interviews. We recruited researchers from the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and the Amsterdam University Medical Center to participate in focus group discussions that consisted of researchers from similar academic ranks and disciplinary fields. We asked participants to reflect on the characteristics of a responsible research climate, the barriers they (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  7. Explaining Variance in Perceived Research Misbehavior: Results From a Survey Among Academic Researchers in Amsterdam.Frans Oort, Lex Bouter, Brian Martinson, Joeri Tijdink & Tamarinde Haven - 2021 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 6 (1).
    BackgroundConcerns about research misbehavior in academic science have sparked interest in the factors that may explain research misbehavior. Often three clusters of factors are distinguished: individual factors, climate factors and publication factors. Our research question was: to what extent can individual, climate and publication factors explain the variance in frequently perceived research misbehaviors?MethodsFrom May 2017 until July 2017, we conducted a survey study among academic researchers in Amsterdam. The survey included three measurement instruments that we previously reported individual results of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  8.  2
    Correction To: Ranking Major and Minor Research Misbehaviors: Results From a Survey Among Participants of Four World Conferences on Research Integrity.Gerben ter Riet, Brian C. Martinson, Nils Axelsen, Joeri Tijdink & Lex M. Bouter - 2019 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 4 (1).
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9.  2
    Important Topics for Fostering Research Integrity by Research Performing and Research Funding Organizations: A Delphi Consensus Study.Joeri Tijdink, Lidwine Mokkink, Ana Marušić, Natalie Evans, Guy Widdershoven, Lex Bouter, Rea Roje & Krishma Labib - 2021 - Science and Engineering Ethics 27 (4):1-22.
    To foster research integrity, it is necessary to address the institutional and system-of-science factors that influence researchers’ behavior. Consequently, research performing and research funding organizations could develop comprehensive RI policies outlining the concrete steps they will take to foster RI. So far, there is no consensus on which topics are important to address in RI policies. Therefore, we conducted a three round Delphi survey study to explore which RI topics to address in institutional RI policies by seeking consensus from research (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10.  7
    The Effects of Industry Funding and Positive Outcomes in the Interpretation of Clinical Trial Results: A Randomized Trial Among Dutch Psychiatrists.Joeri K. Tijdink, Yvo M. Smulders, Lex M. Bouter & Christiaan H. Vinkers - 2019 - BMC Medical Ethics 20 (1):1-8.
    Most studies are inclined to report positive rather than negative or inconclusive results. It is currently unknown how clinicians appraise the results of a randomized clinical trial. For example, how does the study funding source influence the appraisal of an RCT, and do positive findings influence perceived credibility and clinical relevance? This study investigates whether psychiatrists’ appraisal of a scientific abstract is influenced by industry funding disclosures and a positive outcome. Dutch psychiatrists were randomized to evaluate a scientific abstract describing (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  6
    Expanding Research Integrity: A Cultural-Practice Perspective.Govert Valkenburg, Guus Dix, Joeri Tijdink & Sarah de Rijcke - 2021 - Science and Engineering Ethics 27 (1):1-23.
    Research integrity is usually discussed in terms of responsibilities that individual researchers bear towards the scientific work they conduct, as well as responsibilities that institutions have to enable those individual researchers to do so. In addition to these two bearers of responsibility, a third category often surfaces, which is variably referred to as culture and practice. These notions merit further development beyond a residual category that is to contain everything that is not covered by attributions to individuals and institutions. This (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark