Defining and Handling Research Misconduct: A Comparison Between Chinese and European Institutional Policies

Dan Li,Gustaaf Cornelis
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264620927628
2020-07-02
Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics
Abstract:Research institutions are responsible for promoting research integrity and handling allegations of research misconduct. Due to various cultural and social contexts, institutional policies from different cultural backgrounds exhibit many differences, such as their primary concern and mechanisms for dealing with allegations of research misconduct. This comparative study analyses research misconduct policies from 21 Chinese and 22 European universities. The results show that definitions of research misconduct from all retrieved policies go beyond fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism but include different types of questionable research practices. Their procedures for handling research misconduct differ in, for example, confidentiality and disclosure of conflict of interest. Differences can also be found in their governance approaches (“bottom-up” versus “top-down”).
ethics,medical ethics
What problem does this paper attempt to address?