Instruments lacking comprehensive validation dominate research on researcher behavior: a scoping review based on the...

This study aimed to map and present the available information regarding instruments measuring capability, motivation, and opportunity in researcher behavior studies.

This scoping review followed Joanna Briggs Institute guidance. We identified eligible studies by systematically searching PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest Theses and Dissertations. Pairs of researchers extracted data from the included studies independently and in duplicate. We charted the general characteristics of the studies and the characteristics of the instruments in the included studies against the COM-B (capability, opportunity, motivation, and behavior) model. We also provide an overview of the available measurement properties for each instrument using the COSMIN taxonomy.

Sixteen studies were included. The included studies presented diverse participants in terms of their research fields and research roles. The behavioral context mostly included behaviors often promoted in the meta-research literature or behaviors related to the involvement of health care professionals in research. A wide range of instruments have been used to measure capability, opportunity, and motivation in studies of research-related behavior. The measurement properties of these instruments were often not exhaustively investigated, and most studies did not consider existing validated instruments to measure the components of the COM-B model.

Many approaches to measure capability, motivation, and opportunity are available, but most lack robust validation, potentially contributing to research waste. Adaptation and further validation of the most promising existing instruments are needed to guide future behavioral studies in the meta-research field.

We rely on research to guide important decisions in health, policy, and everyday life. But for research to be credible, scientists need to follow practices that make their work more transparent and reliable. However, these practices are not consistently followed. To improve adherence, it is important to understand what influences researchers' behavior. One widely used approach from behavioral science is the capability, opportunity, motivation, and behavior (COM-B) model, which suggests that behavior results from three key factors: capability, opportunity, and motivation. Applied to researchers, this means having the necessary knowledge and skills, access to supportive environments and resources, and the intention to act. These factors are commonly assessed using questionnaires designed to measure behavioral influences. We reviewed all published studies that developed or used questionnaires to measure COM-B-related factors in research settings. Sixteen studies described 16 different instruments. Most were developed for a single project and underwent only limited testing. In many cases, it was unclear whether the tools accurately measured what they intended to assess. This raises concerns about the strength and reliability of the findings produced using these measures. Our review highlights the need for stronger, shared tools that have undergone thorough validation. Rather than developing new instruments for each study, researchers could refine and build on the best existing ones. Doing so will help future studies offer better insights into what drives researcher behavior and lead to more effective efforts to strengthen the quality and integrity of science.