External and Intrapsychic Factors Determining Unethical Behaviours and Controversial Practices in Science
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/65vqsk72Abstract
From one side, investigators are expected to strive for reliability and trustworthiness in publishing scientific data; on the other, meeting the numerous research indicators of their professional work. In this article, various aspects of controversial practices concerning intentional skipping essential issues in a paper, hypothesizing after results, data improvement, and statistical and methodological tweaking are examined. The current paper proposes a holistic understanding of the causes of controversial practices that includes the constellation of external factors in the context of the intrapsychic functioning of scientists. This approach gives a deeper insight into unethical behaviour mechanisms through the prism of needs, values, and personality traits. Self-enhancement values, narcissism, Machiavellianism, and hubristic pride, as well as needs for competition, glory, success, self-esteem enhancement, and obsessive passion, may provide fertile ground for unethical behaviour in science.
Downloads
References
1. Abbott, A., Cyranoski, D., Jones, N., Maher, B., Schiermeier, Q., & Van Noorden, R.
(2010). Metrics: Do metrics matter? Nature, 465(7300), 860–862.
https://doi.org/10.1038/465860a
2. Anderson M., Ronning, E. A., De Vries, R., Martinson B. C. (2007). The Perverse
Effects of Competition on Scientists’ Work and Relationships. Science &
Engineering Ethics, 13(4), 437–461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-007-9042-5
3. Bektaş, Ç., Tayauova, G. (2019). Science ethics and social responsibilities of
scientists. The Journal of International Scientific Research, 4 (2), 108-120.
https://doi.org/10.23834/isrjournal.543510
4. Børsen, T., Antia, A.N., Glessmer, M.S. (2013). A case study of teaching social
responsibility to doctoral students in the climate sciences. Science & Engineering
Ethics, 19(4), 1491-1504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-013-9485-9
5. Burbules, N. C. (2015). The changing functions of citation: From knowledge
networking to academic cash-value. Paedagogica Historica, 51(6), 716–726.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00309230.2015.1051553
6. Bureau J. S., Vallerand R. J., Ntoumanis N., Lafrenie`re M-A. K. (2013). On passion
and moral behavior in achievement settings: The mediating role of pride.
Motivation & Emotion, 37(1), 121–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-012-
9292-7
7. Carpenter, C.R., Cone, D.C., and Sarli, C.C. (2014). Using publication metrics to
highlight academic productivity and research impact. Academy Emergency
Medical. 21, 1160. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.12482
8. Dadkhah, M., Elias, N., Jazi, M. D., Christova-Bagdassarian, V., & Abu-Elteen, K. H.
(2015). A new challenge in the academic world: earning real money and
eminence by paper publishing. Jordan Journal of Biological Sciences, 8(2), 73–75.
https://doi.org/10.12816/0027564
9. Diamandis, E. P. (2013). "Nobelitis: a common disease among Nobel laureates?"
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine, 51, 8, 1573-1574.
https://doi.org/10.1515/cclm-2013-0273
10. Edwards, M. A. & Roy, S. (2017). Academic Research in the 21st Century:
Maintaining Scientific Integrity in a Climate of Perverse Incentives and Hypercompetition. Environmental Engineering Science, 34(1), 51–61.
https://doi.org/10.1089/ees.2016.0223
11. Engel, C. (2015). Scientific Disintegrity as a Public Bad. Perspectives on
Psychological Science, 10(3), 361–379.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615577865
12. Eva, K. W. (2017). How would you like your salami? A guide to slicing. Medical
Education, 51(5), 456-457. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13285
13. Fanelli, D. (2009) How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic
Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data. PLAS ONE, 4(5): e5738.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005738
14. Feldman, G., Chao, M.M., Farh, J-L., Bardi, A. (2015). The motivation and inhibition
of breaking the rules: Personal values structures predict unethicality. Journal of
Research in Personality, 59, 69–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2015.09.003
15. Fiedler, K. (2011). Voodoo correlations are everywhere—Not only in neuroscience.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 163–171.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691611400237
16. Fochler, M., Felt, U., Müller, R. (2016). Unsustainable Growth, Hyper-Competition,
and Worth in Life Science Research: Narrowing Evaluative Repertoires in
Doctoral and postdoctoral scientists’ work and lives. Minerva, 54(2), 175–200.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-016-9292-y
17. Gerasimova, O., & Kryachko, V. (2019). Academic career of young scientists:
Motivations and professional roles. Upravlenets, 10(6), 77–87.
https://doi.org/10.29141/2218-5003-2019-10-6-7
18. Gruber, T. (2014). Academic sell-out: How an obsession with metrics and rankings is
damaging academia. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 24(2), 165–177.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2014.970248
19. Hodgins, H. S., & Knee, R. (2002). The integrating self and conscious experience. In
E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of Self-determination research (pp.
87–100). University of Rochester Press.
20. Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS
Medicine, 2(8), e124. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
21. Jain, A.K (2010). Ethical issues in scientific publication. Indian Journal of
Orthopaedics, 44(3), 235. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.65133
22. John, L. K.; Loewenstein, G.; Prelec, D. (2012). Measuring the Prevalence of
Questionable Research Practices With Incentives for Truth Telling. Psychological
Science, 23(5), 524–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611430953
23. Johnsson, L.; Eriksson, S.; Helgesson, G.; Hansson, M. G. (2014). Making researchers
moral: Why trustworthiness requires more than ethics guidelines and review. Research
Ethics, 10(1), 29–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016113504778
24. Karlsson, J., Beaufils, P. (2013). Legitimate division of large data sets, salami slicing
and dual publication, where does a fraud begin? Knee Surgery, Sports
Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 21(4), 751-752. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-
013-2413-3
25. Kerr, N. L. (1998). HARKing: Hypothesizing after the results are known. Personality
and Social Psychology Review, 2 (3), 196–217.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0203_4
26. Kish-Gephart, J. J., Harrison, D. A., & Treviño, L. K. (2010). Bad apples, bad cases,
and bad barrels: Meta-analytic evidence about sources of unethical decisions at
work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(1), 1–31.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017103
27. Kornfeld, D.S. (2012). Perspective: research misconduct: the search for a remedy.
Academic Medicine, 87: 877– 882.
https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e318257ee6a
28. Leonard, D., Becker R., & Coate, K. (2005). To prove myself at the highest level: The
benefits of doctoral study. Higher Education Research & Development, 24(2),
135–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360500062904
29. Luther, F. (2008). Publication ethics and scientific misconduct: the role of authors.
Journal of Orthodontics, 35(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1179/146531207225022347
30. Martinez-Conde, S., Powell, D., Macknik, S. L. (2016). The plight of the celebrity
scientist. Scientific American, 315, 4, 64-67.
https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1016-64.
31. Miller, J. D., Hoffman, B. J., Gaughan, E. T., Gentile, B., Maples, J., & Keith, C. W.
(2011). Grandiose and vulnerable narcissism: A nomological network analysis.
Journal of Personality, 79(5), 1013–1042. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
6494.2010.00711.x
32. Oflu, C., Baluku, M.M., & Otto, K. (2020). Career success in the university setting:
Examining the role of narcissism facets. Current Psychology.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020- 00614-6
33. Oravec, J. A. (2019). The "Dark Side" of Academics? Emerging Issues in the Gaming
and Manipulation of Metrics in Higher Education. The Review of Higher
Education. 42(3), 859–877. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2019.0022
34. Pincus, A. L., Ansell, E. B., Pimentel, C. A., Cain, N. M., Wright, A. G. C., & Levy,
K. N. (2009). Initial construction and validation of pathological narcissism
inventory. Psychological Assessment, 21(3), 365–379.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016530
35. Pulfrey, C., & Butera, F. (2013). Why neoliberal values of self-enhancement lead to
cheating in higher education: A motivational account. Psychological Science,
24(11), 2153-2162. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797613487221
36. Resnik, D. B., & Elliott, K.C. (2016). The Ethical Challenges of Socially Responsible
Science. Accountability in Research, 23(1), 31–46.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2014.1002608
37. Rest, J. R., & Barnett, R. (1986). Moral development: Advances in research and
theory. New York: Praeger.
38. Rokeach, M. (1973). The nature of human values. New York: Free Press.
39. Rogoza, R., Kwiatkowska, M. M., Kowalski, C. M., Ślaski, S. (2018). A brief tale of
the two faces of narcissism and the two facets of pride. Personality and
Individual Differences, 126, 104–108.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.01.027
40. Schwartz, S. H. (2010). Basic values: How they motivate and inhibit prosocial
behavior. In M. Mikulincer P. R. Shaver (Ed.), Prosocial motives, emotions, and
behavior: The better angels of our nature (pp. 221–241). American Psychological
Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12061-012
41. Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical
advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, 25(1), 1-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60281-6
42. Shamoo, A. E., Resnik, D.B. (2015). Responsible Conduct of Research.: New York:
Oxford University Press.
43. Sheldon, K. M. (2002). The self-concordance model of healthy goal striving: When
personal goals correctly represent the person. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.),
Handbook of self-determination research (pp. 65–86). University of Rochester Press.
44. Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-Positive Psychology:
Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting Anything
as Significant. Psychological Science, 22(11), 1359–1366.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632
45. Singh, A., & Purohit, B. (2011). Ethical Issues in Scientific Research in Developing
Countries. Online Journal of Health Ethics, 7(1).
https://doi.org/10.18785/ojhe.0701.03
46. Smaldino, P. E., McElreath, R. (2016). The natural selection of bad science. Royal
Society Open Science, 3(9), 160384. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.160384
47. Tijdink, J.K., Bouter L.M., Veldkamp C.L.S, van de Ven P.M., Wicherts J.M.,
Smulders Y.M. (2016). Personality Traits Are Associated with Research
Misbehavior in Dutch Scientists: A Cross-Sectional Study. PLoS ONE, 11(9),
e0163251. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0163251
48. Tolsgaard, M. G., Ellaway, R., Woods, N., Norman, G. (2019). Salami-slicing and
plagiarism: How should we respond? Advances in Health Sciences Education, 24,
3-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-019-09876-7
49. Tracy, J. L., Cheng, J. T., Robins, R. W., & Trzesniewski, K. H. (2009). Authentic and
hubristic pride: The affective core of selfesteem and narcissism. Self and Identity,
8, 196–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298860802505053
50. Vallerand, R. J., Blanchard, C., Mageau, G. A., Koestner, R., Ratelle, C. F., Le´onard,
M., Gahne M., Marsolais J. (2003). Les passions de l’aˆme: On obsessive and
harmonious passion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 756–767.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.756
51. Van Noorden, R. (2010). Metrics: A profusion of measures. Nature, 465, 864.
https://doi.org/10.1038/465864a
52. Walsh J. A. (2014). The Jealousy of Scientific Men. The American Biology Teacher,
76(1), 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2014.76.1.6
53. Watson, G. W., Berkley, R. A., & Papamarcos, S. D. (2009). Ambiguous allure: The
value? Pragmatics model of ethical decision making. Business and Society Review,
114(1), 1- 29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8594.2009.00333.x
54. Wellington, J., Sikes, P. (2007). «A doctorate in a tight compartment»: Why do
students choose a professional doctorate and what impact does it have on their
personal and professional lives? Studies in Higher Education, 31, 723–734.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070601004358.
55. Winkler, J.T. (1987). The intellectual celebrity syndrome. Lancet, 329(8530):450.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(87)90151-6
56. Winston, C. N., Maher, H., & Easvaradoss, V. (2017). Needs and values: An
exploration. The Humanistic Psychologist, 45(3), 295–311.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Author
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
