Brabazon Academic Authorship with Integrity Training (original) (raw)
Related papers
Academic Writing in Teaching Research Integrity
CEPS Journal, 2023
The primary aim of this paper is to present the key elements that characterise online course design, addressing the process of designing, implementing, and evaluating an online course for Bachelor's degree students that focuses on developing their academic writing skills. These skills are essential for university students as they provide the knowledge necessary to express themselves effectively, analyse texts, think critically, cite correctly, and avoid plagiarism. Academic writing is also the foundation for responsible research practice. The Research Integrity Competency Profile Model, which includes four main areas, namely values and principles, research practice, publication and dissemination, and violations, was created prior to the design of the course and the skills students need to acquire at the Bachelor's level for successful academic writing were identified. A small private online course was carefully designed in 2020. It consisted of a variety of assignments, including interactive elements such as quizzes, videos, and work in international interdisciplinary groups. The participants of the course were 36 students from Slovenia, the Netherlands, and the Czech Republic. The course lasted four weeks and covered topics such as literature analysis, writing a research paper, avoiding plagiarism, paraphrasing, and citation styles, among others. The course was launched in 2021 for two consecutive instances. The participating students evaluated the course positively, describing the assignments as motivating, useful, and well-structured. However, they concluded that they need more practice in this area, and we suggest that a university course be established to provide all students with the necessary academic writing skills.
Authorship revisited: Bestowing undue credit on students
The South African Journal of Psychiatry : SAJP : the Journal of the Society of Psychiatrists of South Africa, 2021
The South African Journal of Psychiatry (SAJP) uses the African Online Scientific Information Systems (AOSIS) platform and explicitly subscribes to AOSIS's guidelines. African Online Scientific Information Systems, and by proxy, SAJP, states that it follows generally accepted standards regarding authorship allocation.
Education for health (Abingdon, England)
Scientific paper authorship is an important academic achievement for all research professionals. Being designated as an author of a paper has academic, research, social and financial implications. Signing of a manuscript as an author does confer credit but also transfers responsibility. While authors get credit for the published work, they must accept the public responsibility that goes with it. Over the past few years, there has been a rising trend in authorship abuses. The prevalent culture of "publish or perish" appears to be responsible for this. In an endeavor to ensure honest practice, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the Vancouver Group, developed the criteria for authorship and said that "all persons designated as authors should qualify for authorship and all those who qualify should be listed." However, authorship irregularities continue to exist and are a cause of concern. Budding authors should be enlightened about concur...
Ethical Issues in Academic Authorship: A Study on Group Writing
Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 2022
In the academic world, the authors and the publication of academic writing are inseparable. By publishing academic writing, academicians can improve their performance and increase their visibility in academia. However, academic writing is not an easy thing, as it is directly tied to the ethics of academic authorship. However, there have been several forms of unethical identified in academic authorship. Among them is the unethical placement of the author's name. This dishonesty certainly has a negative impact on the world of scholarship because those who are in this world of scholarship are said to have the nature of high integrity. Among the main causes of this problem is the need to achieve annual target. Is academic authorship tied to the ethics of academic authorship? What are the forms of dishonesty in academic authorship? There are two main objectives in solving the question. First, explain the ethics of academic authorship. Second, explain the forms of dishonesty specifica...
PLoS ONE, 2011
Background: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate evidence about authorship issues and provide synthesis of research on authorship across all research fields. Methods: We searched bibliographical databases to identify articles describing empirical quantitive or qualitative research from all scholarly fields on different aspects of authorship. Search was limited to original articles and reviews. Results: The final sample consisted of 123 articles reporting results from 118 studies. Most studies came for biomedical and health research fields and social sciences. Study design was usually a survey (53%) or descriptive study (27%); only 2 studies used randomized design. We identified four 4 general themes common to all research disciplines: authorship perceptions, definitions and practices, defining order of authors on the byline, ethical and unethical authorship practices, and authorship issues related to student/non-research personnel-supervisor collaboration. For 14 survey studies, a meta-analysis showed a pooled weighted average of 29% (95% CI 24% to 35%) researchers reporting their own or others' experience with misuse of authorship. Authorship misuse was reported more often by researcher outside of the USA and UK: 55% (95% CI 45% to 64%) for 4 studies in France, South Africa, India and Bangladesh vs. 23% (95% CI 18% to 28%) in USA/UK or international journal settings. Interpretation: High prevalence of authorship problems may have severe impact on the integrity of the research process, just as more serious forms of research misconduct. There is a need for more methodologically rigorous studies to understand the allocation of publication credit across research disciplines.
New Review of Academic Librarianship, 2019
This research investigated the impact of implementing an asynchronous online academic integrity workshop at the University of South Alabama. The workshop featured interactive modules designed to teach students about ethical conduct, impart study skills correlated with academic integrity, and provide instruction on integrating and citing sources. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected through a pretest and posttest and an open-ended survey. Quantitative analysis indicated statistically significant improvements in scores among the 1,312 participants. Qualitative feedback revealed that students became more aware of the expectations of higher education, including the fact that scholarship is a conversation. These positive results correlate with prior research concerning academic integrity workshops. While previous studies explore particular acts of academic misconduct, especially plagiarism, this study demonstrates how collaboration between a university's library and writing centre can familiarise students with both the practical aspects of academic integrity and the expectations of college coursework and academic culture.
Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 2013
In this commentary, we present evidence that unethical authorship (eg, guest and ghost authoring) and other publication practices are not restricted to the pharmaceutical industry; they also occur in academia. Such practices are not an industry problem—they are a research problem. To enhance trust in industry-sponsored research, companies have made rapid and far-reaching changes to their publication guidelines, policies, and procedures. Professional medical writers have adopted, and continue to implement, these changes. Although evidence indicates that industry practices are improving, there is certainly more to do, both in industry and academia. We invite readers to join ongoing efforts to promote ethical publication practices.
Lung India, 2012
Authorship is a highly sought attribute, as it is associated with recognition for creativity. In addition, it is associated with multiple benefits such as peer recognition, better evaluation and financial gains. These possibilities spur scientists to author articles, but some take recourse to unethical practice of honorary authorships. Another unethical practice is that of ghostwriting. It is a phenomenon wherein individuals who write the articles are not named as authors and are not even acknowledged to be associated with the manuscript. Reputed and renowned scientists, who have not participated in the conduct of the study or in the manuscript preparation, are enrolled by the industry to allow their names to be mentioned as authors. This phenomenon is harmful not only because it suppresses the contribution of ghost-authors but also because the guest "authors" bestow underserved credibility upon an "industry-written" paper. The readers have no way of knowing the bias that may have crept in. The journal editors, institution, and government agencies need to come together to ensure that these malpractices are curbed by employing various measures such as creating awareness amongst authors, academicians, and administrators; enunciating and implementing policies to dissuade unethical behavior, protecting whistle-blowers, and providing punishments to those indulging in malpractices. All of us should remember that if unchecked, these deviant behaviors have the potential to compromise the credibility of scientific research and scientific publications.
The Malversations of Authorship -Current Status in Academic Community and How to Prevent It
Aim: Aim of article was to evaluate knowledge and practice of authorship issues among the academic population in the medical field. Material and methods: Article has an analytical character and includes 69 academic workers (from the medical field, with the status of a regular employee of the Faculty of Medicine or a professional associate) who responded to the survey. Results: Within the total number of respondents in the study, 34.8% of them were added as coauthors, although they did not have any input in the writing process. Even 47.8% of the respondents were under psychological pressure, that they have to add their superiors to the list of authors, though they did not have any contribution at any stage of the article preparation, while 29% of the respondents had a tacit agreement about mutual adding to the author's list, and 36.2% added their superiors to the author's list, in order that the first author would get a permission to publish the article in a certain journal. Conclusion: The relationship between the author, the mentor, the data processing person, the person providing the moral support etc. must be established, and not all of them has a place in the list of authors, they should be given special places at the end of the article, a space for acknowledgements, where these people may be mentioned. The consciousness of the academic community must change for the purpose of the concrete progress of the academic community and the scientific contributions of its members.
One approach to plagiarism prevention focuses on improving students' authorial identity, but work in this area depends on robust measures. This paper presents the development of a psychometrically robust measure of authorial identity – the Student Attitudes and Beliefs about Authorship Scale. In the item generation phase, a pool of items was developed and assessed for content validity by subject matter experts. In the exploratory phase, data from 439 higher education students were used to identify a latent variable model with three factors: ‘authorial confidence’, ‘valuing writing’ and ‘identification with author’. In the confirmatory phase, data from 306 higher education students were used to test the three-factor model's reliability and validity. The three-factor structure was confirmed, and the results showed that the SABAS has a stronger psychometric basis than previously available measures. This measure of authorial identity can be used with confidence in research and pedagogy to help students improve their authorial identity.