5 found
Order:
Disambiguations
Serge P. J. M. Horbach [3]Serge Horbach [2]
  1.  45
    Working with Research Integrity—Guidance for Research Performing Organisations: The Bonn PRINTEGER Statement.Mira Zöller, Hub Zwart, Knut Vie, Krista Varantola, Marta Tazewell, Margit Sutrop, Thomas Saretzki, Sarah Rijcke, Barend Meulen, Inge Lerouge, Matthias Kaiser, Jacques Janssen, Ingrid Jacobsen, Serge Horbach, Bert Heinrichs, Gloria Fuster, Carlo Casonato, Henriette Bout, Giles Birchley, Sharon Bailey, Frank Anthun & Ellen-Marie Forsberg - 2018 - Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (4):1023-1034.
    This document presents the Bonn PRINTEGER Consensus Statement: Working with Research Integrity—Guidance for research performing organisations. The aim of the statement is to complement existing instruments by focusing specifically on institutional responsibilities for strengthening integrity. It takes into account the daily challenges and organisational contexts of most researchers. The statement intends to make research integrity challenges recognisable from the work-floor perspective, providing concrete advice on organisational measures to strengthen integrity. The statement, which was concluded February 7th 2018, provides guidance on (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  2.  88
    Working with Research Integrity—Guidance for Research Performing Organisations: The Bonn PRINTEGER Statement.Ellen-Marie Forsberg, Frank O. Anthun, Sharon Bailey, Giles Birchley, Henriette Bout, Carlo Casonato, Gloria González Fuster, Bert Heinrichs, Serge Horbach, Ingrid Skjæggestad Jacobsen, Jacques Janssen, Matthias Kaiser, Inge Lerouge, Barend van der Meulen, Sarah de Rijcke, Thomas Saretzki, Margit Sutrop, Marta Tazewell, Krista Varantola, Knut Jørgen Vie, Hub Zwart & Mira Zöller - 2018 - Science and Engineering Ethics 24 (4):1023-1034.
    This document presents the Bonn PRINTEGER Consensus Statement: Working with Research Integrity—Guidance for research performing organisations. The aim of the statement is to complement existing instruments by focusing specifically on institutional responsibilities for strengthening integrity. It takes into account the daily challenges and organisational contexts of most researchers. The statement intends to make research integrity challenges recognisable from the work-floor perspective, providing concrete advice on organisational measures to strengthen integrity. The statement, which was concluded February 7th 2018, provides guidance on (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  3.  5
    Innovating Editorial Practices: Academic Publishers at Work.Willem Halffman & Serge P. J. M. Horbach - 2020 - Research Integrity and Peer Review 5 (1).
    BackgroundTriggered by a series of controversies and diversifying expectations of editorial practices, several innovative peer review procedures and supporting technologies have been proposed. However, adoption of these new initiatives seems slow. This raises questions about the wider conditions for peer review change and about the considerations that inform decisions to innovate. We set out to study the structure of commercial publishers’ editorial process, to reveal how the benefits of peer review innovations are understood, and to describe the considerations that inform (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  4.  13
    On the Willingness to Report and the Consequences of Reporting Research Misconduct: The Role of Power Relations.Serge P. J. M. Horbach, Eric Breit, Willem Halffman & Svenn-Erik Mamelund - 2020 - Science and Engineering Ethics 26 (3):1595-1623.
    While attention to research integrity has been growing over the past decades, the processes of signalling and denouncing cases of research misconduct remain largely unstudied. In this article, we develop a theoretically and empirically informed understanding of the causes and consequences of reporting research misconduct in terms of power relations. We study the reporting process based on a multinational survey at eight European universities. Using qualitative data that witnesses of research misconduct or of questionable research practices provided, we aim to (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  5.  12
    Journal Peer Review and Editorial Evaluation: Cautious Innovator or Sleepy Giant?Serge P. J. M. Horbach & Willem Halffman - 2020 - Minerva 58 (2):139-161.
    Peer review of journal submissions has become one of the most important pillars of quality management in academic publishing. Because of growing concerns with the quality and effectiveness of the system, a host of enthusiastic innovators has proposed and experimented with new procedures and technologies. However, little is known about whether these innovations manage to convince other journal editors. This paper will address open questions regarding the implementation of new review procedures, the occurrence rate of various peer review procedures and (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation