Search results

This chapter considers the current standards that exist for the conduct of research and whether these standards are being met. Issues of scope and terminology are discussed and debated. Also considered are the reasons and benefits to the Academy of Social Sciences and other professional and disciplinary bodies by being involved in developing generic ethics principles in social science research.

This paper aims to reveal the current status of China university teachers’ learning content focus (LCF) and collaborative learning (CL) and empirically examine the influential effects LCF and CL play on individual pursuit of lifelong learning (LLL) by investigating the mediating role of individual psychological empowerment (PE).

Descriptive analysis and structural equation modeling (SEM), including exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and path analysis, are conducted.

The results of this study indicate significant direct impacts of LCF, CL and PE on university teachers’ LLL. LCF shares significant positive relationship with PE, validating the mediating role of PE between LCF and LLL. University teachers show their consciousness of learning required in professionalism and willingness to keep learning. However, the four major discrepancies: Lifelong Learning Process (LLLP) vs Lifelong Learning Behavior (LLLB), focus of professional promotion system vs that in LCF, lower levels in Self-determination and Impact (in PE) and less external partnerships, indicate the gaps between learning supports provided by university and policy designing in promoting LLL.

This study emphasizes the LLL ideology in professional development. Emphasis on university teachers’ learning within specific professional development contexts would encourage researchers to pay more attention to context-relevant factors enhancing LLL. And the four major discrepancies identified in this study deserve further investigations.

This chapter considers the implications of the lack of uniformity, consistency and harmonisation in defining and regulating research integrity across Europe. In view of this, recent initiatives of the Council of Research Ministers and of the European Commission aim to provide a common point of reference in institutional terms and legal terms. However researchers and institutions themselves remain ultimately responsible for detecting, investigating and adjudicating any allegations of scientific misconduct through their established procedures. Therefore, a complementary approach between the Commission’s initiatives and the self-regulatory approach of local/national structures is desirable. A major step towards this direction could be the formulation of a single European-wide definition of research integrity.

The overall goal of science is to build a valid and reliable body of knowledge about the functioning of the world and how applying that knowledge can change it. As personnel and human resources management researchers, we aim to contribute to the respective bodies of knowledge to provide both employers and employees with a workable foundation to help with those problems they are confronted with. However, what research on research has consistently demonstrated is that the scientific endeavor possesses existential issues including a substantial lack of (a) solid theory, (b) replicability, (c) reproducibility, (d) proper and generalizable samples, (e) sufficient quality control (i.e., peer review), (f) robust and trustworthy statistical results, (g) availability of research, and (h) sufficient practical implications. In this chapter, we first sing a song of sorrow regarding the current state of the social sciences in general and personnel and human resources management specifically. Then, we investigate potential grievances that might have led to it (i.e., questionable research practices, misplaced incentives), only to end with a verse of hope by outlining an avenue for betterment (i.e., open science and policy changes at multiple levels).

The purpose of this study is to examine characteristics of retracted publications from Indian authors and inspect a relationship between journal impact factor (JIF) and the number of authors (NoA).

The authors examined the general characteristics of retracted publications and investigated the correlation between JIF and NoA from Indian authors from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2022. Data were mined from retraction watch http://retractiondatabase.org/ (n = 1,459) and determined the year of publication, year of retraction, authors, journals, publishers and causes of the retractions. A journal citation report was extracted to gather the JIFs.

About one-third of retracted papers were published in 2020; 2022 has the highest retraction rate (723); studies with two authors represent about one-third (476) of the published articles; Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing (354) has the highest number of retractions; Springer published the most retracted papers (674); and the majority of the journal (1,133) is indexed in journal citation reports, with impact factor extending from 0.504 to 43.474. Retraction due to legal reasons/legal threats was the most predominant reason for retraction.

This study reflects growth in author collaborations with a surge in the JIF. This study recommends that quick retraction is essential to reduce the adverse effects of faulty research.

This paper aims to examine academic dishonesty and research misconduct, two forms of academic fraud, and provides suggestions for future research informed by criminological theory.

After reviewing prior literature, this paper outlines four general criminological theories that can explain academic fraud.

While criminological theory has been applied to some studies of academic dishonesty, research misconduct has rarely been examined within a broader theoretical context.

This paper provides a blueprint for future theoretically informed analyses of academic fraud.

This paper represents a unique attempt to apply general criminological theories to diverse forms of fraud in higher education settings.

In this chapter, we review the literature that analyzes how the peculiar missions, rules, and incentive systems in the scientific community affect the process and outcomes of the commercialization of academic research. We will focus on how the peculiar institutional logics of academia determine the decision of academics to commercialize their research, and how these logics affect the outsourcing of research from firms to academic laboratories, as well as the attempts of firms to reproduce academic incentive systems within their research labs by allowing their researchers to publish and offering them financial rewards based on their standing in the scientific community. Finally, we report on research that has analyzed how the rules of the scientific community might lead to the production, transfer, and commercialization of false knowledge.

The purpose of this paper is to report on the 174th annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science held 14‐18 February 2008 in Boston, MA, USA.

Conference report.

The conference theme was science and technology from a global perspective, which emphasized the power of science and technology as well as education to assist less‐developed segments of the world society, to improve partnerships among already developed countries and to spur knowledge‐driven transformations across a host of fields.

Overviews of six conference symposia are presented, which will be of interest to this journal's readers.

The study aims to analyze the synergy of artificial intelligence (AI), with scientometrics, webometrics and bibliometrics to unlock and to emphasize the potential of the applications and benefits of AI algorithms in these fields.

By conducting a systematic literature review, our aim is to explore the potential of AI in revolutionizing the methods used to measure and analyze scholarly communication, identify emerging research trends and evaluate the impact of scientific publications. To achieve this, we implemented a comprehensive search strategy across reputable databases such as ProQuest, IEEE Explore, EBSCO, Web of Science and Scopus. Our search encompassed articles published from January 1, 2000, to September 2022, resulting in a thorough review of 61 relevant articles.

(1) Regarding scientometrics, the application of AI yields various distinct advantages, such as conducting analyses of publications, citations, research impact prediction, collaboration, research trend analysis and knowledge mapping, in a more objective and reliable framework. (2) In terms of webometrics, AI algorithms are able to enhance web crawling and data collection, web link analysis, web content analysis, social media analysis, web impact analysis and recommender systems. (3) Moreover, automation of data collection, analysis of citations, disambiguation of authors, analysis of co-authorship networks, assessment of research impact, text mining and recommender systems are considered as the potential of AI integration in the field of bibliometrics.

This study covers the particularly new benefits and potential of AI-enhanced scientometrics, webometrics and bibliometrics to highlight the significant prospects of the synergy of this integration through AI.