ArticleScience and engineering ethics2016
Compliance Disengagement in Research: Development and Validation of a New Measure.
Article in Science and engineering ethics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- A randomized implementation trial to increase adoption of evidence-informed consent practices.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- First Do No Harm: Legal Principles Regulating the Future of Artificial Intelligence in Health Care in South Africa.Potchefstroom electronic law journal · 2022Article
- Collective Apathy and Racial Health Disparities in the USA: the Need for Empathy-Building and Examples of Positive Change.Journal of general internal medicine · 2021Article
- Navigating Complex, Ethical Problems in Professional Life: a Guide to Teaching SMART Strategies for Decision-Making.Journal of academic ethics · 2021Article
- Perceived barriers to assessing understanding and appreciation of informed consent in clinical trials: A mixed-method study.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2021Article
- Continuous Evaluation in Ethics Education: A Case Study.Science and engineering ethics · 2018Article
- Five Dimensions of Research Ethics: A Stakeholder Framework for Creating a Climate of Research Integrity.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2018Article
- The Professionalism and Integrity in Research Program: Description and Preliminary Outcomes.Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges · 2018Article
- Misconduct: Lessons from researcher rehab.Nature · 2016Article
- Professional Decision-Making in Research (PDR): The Validity of a New Measure.Science and engineering ethics · 2016Article
- Making Professional Decisions in Research: Measurement and Key Predictors.Accountability in research · 2016Article
- Understanding the Use of Optimal Formatting and Plain Language When Presenting Key Information in Clinical Trials.Journal of empirical research on human research ethics : JERHREArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In the world of research, compliance with research regulations is not the same as ethics, but it is closely related. One could say that compliance is how most societies with advanced research programs operationalize many ethical obligations. This paper reports on the development of the How I Think about Research (HIT-Res) questionnaire, which is an adaptation of the How I Think (HIT) questionnaire that examines the use of cognitive distortions to justify antisocial behaviors. Such an adaptation was justified based on a review of the literature on mechanisms of moral disengagement and self-serving biases, which are used by individuals with normal personalities in a variety of contexts, including research. The HIT-Res adapts all items to refer to matters of research compliance and integrity rather than antisocial behaviors. The HIT-Res was administered as part of a battery of tests to 300 researchers and trainees funded by the US National Institutes of Health. The HIT-Res demonstrated excellent reliability (Cronbach's alpha = .92). Construct validity was established by the correlation of the HIT-Res with measures of moral disengagement (r = .75), cynicism (r = .51), and professional decision-making in research (r = -.36). The HIT-Res will enrich the set of assessment tools available to instructors in the responsible conduct of research and to researchers who seek to understand the factors that influence research integrity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.