Prevalence of Scientific Misconduct Among a Group of Researchers in N igeria

Patrick Ifeanyi Okonta · Theresa M. Rossouw

115 citations0/0 files storedDeveloping World Bioethics

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Academic integrity and plagiarism Ethics in Business and Education Academic Publishing and Open Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is a dearth of information on the prevalence of scientific misconduct from Nigeria. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed at determining the prevalence of scientific misconduct in a group of researchers in Nigeria. Factors associated with the prevalence were ascertained. METHOD: A descriptive study of researchers who attended a scientific conference in 2010 was conducted using the adapted Scientific Misconduct Questionnaire-Revised (SMQ-R). RESULTS: Ninety-one researchers (68.9%) admitted having committed at least one of the eight listed forms of scientific misconduct. Disagreement about authorship was the most common form of misconduct committed (36.4%) while plagiarism was the least (9.2%). About 42% of researchers had committed falsification of data or plagiarism. Analysis of specific acts of misconduct showed that committing plagiarism was inversely associated with years in research (Fisher exact p-value = 0.02); falsifying data was related to perceived low effectiveness of the institution's rules and procedures for reducing scientific misconduct (X(2) = 6.44, p-value = 0.01); and succumbing to pressure from study sponsor to engage in unethical practice was related to sex of researcher (Fisher exact p-value = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The emergent data from this study is a cause for serious concern and calls for prompt intervention. The best response to reducing scientific misconduct will proceed from measures that contain both elements of prevention and enforcement. Training on research ethics has to be integrated into the curriculum of undergraduate and postgraduate students while provision should be made for in-service training of researchers. Penalties against acts of scientific misconduct should be enforced at institutional and national levels.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 115 citations exist upstream.

References

1984The Complete Works of Aristotle the Revised Oxford Translation 2009How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data 2005Scientists behaving badly 2003The politics of publication 2006Normal Misbehavior: Scientists Talk about the Ethics of Research

Cited by

2017Authorship, plagiarism and conflict of interest: views and practices from low/middle-income country health researchers 2019Misconduct and Misbehavior Related to Authorship Disagreements in Collaborative Science 2020Documenting contributions to scholarly articles using CRediT and tenzing 2014Misconduct in research: a descriptive survey of attitudes, perceptions and associated factors in a developing country 2018An empirical analysis of differences in plagiarism among world cultures 2019Researchers’ Perceptions of Ethical Authorship Distribution in Collaborative Research Teams 2017A Cross-Sectional Survey Study to Assess Prevalence and Attitudes Regarding Research Misconduct among Investigators in the Middle East 2017

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.