楼主: 一品小猪
574 1

[学术治理与讨论] 管理研究中的学术不端到底有多普遍? [推广有奖]

  • 7关注
  • 26粉丝

院士

20%

还不是VIP/贵宾

-

威望
1
论坛币
20856 个
学术水平
136 点
热心指数
184 点
信用等级
123 点
经验
11982 点
帖子
1796
精华
0
在线时间
2409 小时
注册时间
2009-6-11
最后登录
2017-11-19

初级热心勋章 初级信用勋章

一品小猪 发表于 2017-7-17 19:35:55 |显示全部楼层

How prevalent is academic misconduct in management research


Christian Hopp,  Gary A. Hoover


2017


Journal of Business Research


Volume 80, November 2017, Pages 73–81



We survey 1215 management researchers, including editors, researchers, and reviewers, about their views and experiences with four types of academic misconduct: plagiarism, self-plagiarism, coercive citations, and questionable reviewing practices. Management researchers hold strict views on plagiarism, though editors report on frequent instances encountered. We find that many management researchers consider self-plagiarism acceptable. There is also a high percentage of editors who report on authors being coerced to add citations of reviewers or journals to their submission. Similarly prevalent is so-called “honorary authorship,” where colleagues and supervisors who did not take part in the work are added as co-authors. Lastly, nearly half of the editors who responded report having witnessed conflicts of interest in peer reviewing. We conclude that the current system of peer reviewing is in need of change, and we discuss possible ramifications to overcome the persistence of academic misconduct.











支持楼主:购买VIP购买贵宾 购买后,论坛将奖励 10 元论坛资金给楼主,以表示您对TA发好贴的支持
 
载入中......

How prevalent is academic misconduct in management research.pdf

248.42 KB

original

stata SPSS
nathan9800 发表于 2017-7-18 18:12:49 |显示全部楼层
prevalent
回复

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 我要注册

GMT+8, 2017-11-19 22:21