Grounds for Ambiguity: Justifiable Bases for Engaging in Questionable Research Practices

Area of Science:

• Biomedical Research Ethics
• Scientific Integrity

Background:

• Questionable research practices (QRPs) pose challenges to scientific integrity.
• Understanding scientists' perceptions of QRP justifications is crucial for ethical training.

Purpose of the Study:

• To assess research scientists' sensitivity to justifications for engaging in QRPs.
• To evaluate the perceived appropriateness and ethical defensibility of QRPs based on provided motives.

Main Methods:

• A within-subjects design was employed with 107 National Institutes of Health principal investigators.
• Participants completed an online survey evaluating research behaviors paired with justifiable or unjustifiable motives.
• Behaviors varied in their ethical ambiguity, ranging from unambiguous to ambiguous.

Main Results:

• Scientists perceived QRPs as more appropriate and defensible when paired with justifiable motives.
• This effect was more pronounced for QRPs with ambiguous ethicality.
• Ambiguous QRPs were deemed defensible when presented with a justifiable motive.

Conclusions:

• Research scientists are sensitive to contextual factors influencing the perception of QRPs.
• Findings suggest that justifications significantly impact the ethical evaluation of research behaviors.
• This understanding can inform the development of effective research integrity training modules.