{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,2]],"date-time":"2026-07-02T20:28:15Z","timestamp":1783024095170,"version":"3.54.6"},"reference-count":66,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"2","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,4,3]],"date-time":"2024-04-03T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1712102400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2024,4,3]],"date-time":"2024-04-03T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1712102400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/100018693","name":"HORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","award":["824481"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["824481"]}],"id":[{"id":"10.13039\/100018693","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"publisher"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Sci Eng Ethics"],"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>Research Integrity (RI) is high on the agenda of both institutions and science policy. The European Union as well as national ministries of science have launched ambitious initiatives to combat misconduct and breaches of research integrity. Often, such initiatives entail attempts to regulate scientific behavior through guidelines that institutions and academic communities can use to more easily identify and deal with cases of misconduct. Rather than framing misconduct as a result of an information deficit, we instead conceptualize Questionable Research Practices (QRPs) as attempts by researchers to reconcile epistemic and social forms of uncertainty in knowledge production. Drawing on previous literature, we define epistemic uncertainty as the inherent intellectual unpredictability of scientific inquiry, while social uncertainty arises from the human-made conditions for scientific work. Our core argument\u2014developed on the basis of 30 focus group interviews with researchers across different fields and European countries\u2014is that breaches of research integrity can be understood as attempts to loosen overly tight coupling between the two forms of uncertainty. Our analytical approach is not meant to relativize or excuse misconduct, but rather to offer a more fine-grained perspective on what exactly it is that researchers want to accomplish by engaging in it. Based on the analysis, we conclude by proposing some concrete ways in which institutions and academic communities could try to reconcile epistemic and social uncertainties on a more collective level, thereby reducing incentives for researchers to engage in misconduct.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-024-00467-3","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2024,4,3]],"date-time":"2024-04-03T11:02:01Z","timestamp":1712142121000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":7,"title":["Navigating the Science System: Research Integrity and Academic Survival Strategies"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"30","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-5676-2122","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Andrea","family":"Reyes Elizondo","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0003-4311-8212","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Wolfgang","family":"Kaltenbrunner","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,4,3]]},"reference":[{"key":"467_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1515\/9781478022336","volume-title":"Complaint!","author":"S Ahmed","year":"2021","unstructured":"Ahmed, S. (2021). Complaint! Duke University Press. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1515\/9781478022336"},{"key":"467_CR2","unstructured":"ALLEA. (2017). The European Code of Conduct for Research Intregrity\u2014Revised Edition. https:\/\/allea.org\/code-of-conduct\/"},{"key":"467_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"149","DOI":"10.4324\/9781315104386-10","volume-title":"The Matrix of Stem Cell Research","author":"M Antonakaki","year":"2019","unstructured":"Antonakaki, M. (2019). Mapping Laboratories and Pinpointing Intentions: The entanglement of audit and reproducibility in the STAP case. In C. Hauskeller, A. Manzeschke, & A. Pichl (Eds.), The Matrix of Stem Cell Research (pp. 149\u2013169). Routledge."},{"issue":"4","key":"467_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2363","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-020-00178-5","volume":"26","author":"L Bouter","year":"2020","unstructured":"Bouter, L. (2020). What research institutions can do to foster research integrity. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(4), 2363\u20132369. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11948-020-00178-5","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"},{"key":"467_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1186\/s41073-016-0024-5","volume":"1","author":"LM Bouter","year":"2016","unstructured":"Bouter, L. M., Tijdink, J., Axelsen, N., Martinson, B. C., & ter Riet, G. (2016). Ranking major and minor research misbehaviors: results from a survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1, 1\u20138. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s41073-016-0024-5","journal-title":"Research Integrity and Peer Review"},{"issue":"3","key":"467_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1531","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-020-00182-9","volume":"26","author":"SV Bruton","year":"2020","unstructured":"Bruton, S. V., Medlin, M., Brown, M., & Sacco, D. F. (2020). Personal motivations and systemic incentives: Scientists on questionable research practices. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(3), 1531\u20131547. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11948-020-00182-9","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"},{"key":"467_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Collaborative Working Group from the conference \u201cKeeping the Pool Clean: Prevention and Management of Misconduct Related Retractions\u201d. (2018). RePAIR consensus guidelines: Responsibilities of Publishers, Agencies, Institutions, and Researchers in protecting the integrity of the research record. Res Integr Peer Rev, 3(15). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s41073-018-0055-1","DOI":"10.1186\/s41073-018-0055-1"},{"key":"467_CR8","unstructured":"Editorial Policy Committee, Council of Science Editors. (2021). CSE\u2019s White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications. https:\/\/www.councilscienceeditors.org\/recommendations-for-promoting-integrity-in-scientific-journal-publications-"},{"key":"467_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"176","DOI":"10.22163\/fteval.2019.386","volume":"48","author":"S de Rijcke","year":"2019","unstructured":"de Rijcke, S., Holtrop, T., Kaltenbrunner, W., Zuijderwijk, J., Beaulieu, A., Franssen, T., van Leeuwen, T., Mongeon, P., Tatum, C., Valkenburg, G., & Wouters, P. (2019). Evaluative inquiry: Engaging research evaluation analytically and strategically. Fteval Journal for Research and Technology Policy Evaluation, 48, 176\u2013182. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.22163\/fteval.2019.386","journal-title":"Fteval Journal for Research and Technology Policy Evaluation"},{"issue":"4","key":"467_CR10","first-page":"62","volume":"321","author":"L Denworth","year":"2019","unstructured":"Denworth, L. (2019). A significant problem. Scientific American, 321(4), 62\u201367.","journal-title":"Scientific American"},{"key":"467_CR11","unstructured":"ELife ends accept\/reject decisions following peer review. (2022). ELife; eLife Sciences Publications Limited. https:\/\/elifesciences.org\/for-the-press\/b2329859\/elife-ends-accept-reject-decisions-following-peer-review"},{"key":"467_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"ENERI\u2014European Network of Research Ethics and Research Integrity, ENRIO\u2014European Network of Research Integrity Offices. (2019). Recommendations for the Investigation of Research Misconduct. In ENRIO Handbook. http:\/\/www.enrio.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/03\/INV-Handbook_ENRIO_web_final.pdf","DOI":"10.1515\/jwiet-2019-0018"},{"key":"467_CR65","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"European Comission CORDIS (2015). Promoting integrity as an integral dimension of excellence in research. PRINTEGER. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3030\/665926.","DOI":"10.3030\/665926"},{"key":"467_CR66","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"European Comission CORDIS. (2018). Standard operating procedures for research integrity, SOPs4RI. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3030\/824481.","DOI":"10.3030\/824481"},{"key":"467_CR13","unstructured":"European Commission. (2021). Horizon Europe (HORIZON) Euratom Research and Training Programme (EURATOM)\u2014General Model Grant Agreement EIC Accelerator Contract Brussels. https:\/\/ec.europa.eu\/info\/funding-tenders\/opportunities\/docs\/2021-2027\/common\/agr-contr\/general-mga_horizon-euratom_en.pdf"},{"key":"467_CR14","unstructured":"European Commission (2022). Horizon Europe (HORIZON) Programme Guide, V2.0. https:\/\/ec.europa.eu\/info\/funding-tenders\/opportunities\/docs\/2021-2027\/horizon\/guidance\/programme-guide_horizon_en.pdf"},{"key":"467_CR15","unstructured":"Evroux, C. (2022). Scientific integrity: Handling knowledge as a public good, European Parliamentary Research Service. PE 739.201. https:\/\/www.europarl.europa.eu\/RegData\/etudes\/BRIE\/2022\/739201\/EPRS_BRI(2022)739201_EN.pdf"},{"key":"467_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0005738","author":"D Fanelli","year":"2009","unstructured":"Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS ONE. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0005738","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"},{"key":"467_CR17","first-page":"79","volume-title":"Promoting research integrity in a global environment","author":"D Fanelli","year":"2011","unstructured":"Fanelli, D. (2011). The black, the white and the grey areas: Towards an international and interdisciplinary definition of scientific misconduct. In T. Mayer & N. Steneck (Eds.), Promoting research integrity in a global environment (pp. 79\u201390). World Scientific Publishing."},{"key":"467_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"149","DOI":"10.1038\/494149a","volume":"494","author":"D Fanelli","year":"2013","unstructured":"Fanelli, D. (2013). Redefine misconduct as distorted reporting. Nature, 494, 149. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/494149a","journal-title":"Nature"},{"issue":"3","key":"467_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"349","DOI":"10.1080\/09505431.2018.1485640","volume":"27","author":"M Fochler","year":"2018","unstructured":"Fochler, M., & Sigl, L. (2018). Anticipatory uncertainty: How academic and industry researchers in the life sciences experience and manage the uncertainties of the research process differently. Science as Culture, 27(3), 349\u2013374. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/09505431.2018.1485640","journal-title":"Science as Culture"},{"key":"467_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1023","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-018-0034-4","volume":"24","author":"EM Forsberg","year":"2018","unstructured":"Forsberg, E. M., Anthun, F. O., Bailey, S., Birchley, G., Bout, H., Casonato, C., Gonz\u00e1lez Fuster, G., Heinrichs, B., Horbach, S., Skj\u00e6ggestad Jacobsen, I., Jansen, J., Kaiser, M., Lerouge, I., van der Meulen, B., de Rijcke, S., Saretzki, T., Sutrop, M., Tazewell, M., Varantola, K., & Z\u00f6ller, M. (2018). Working with Research Integrity\u2014Guidance for Research Performing Organisations: The Bonn PRINTEGER Statement. Science and Engineering Ethics, 24, 1023\u20131034. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11948-018-0034-4","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"},{"key":"467_CR22","unstructured":"Global Science Forum. (2007). Best Practices for Ensuring Scientific Integrity and Preventing Misconduct. Organization For Economic Co-operation and Development. https:\/\/www.oecd.org\/sti\/sci-tech\/40188303.pdf."},{"issue":"3\/4","key":"467_CR23","first-page":"134","volume":"5","author":"EJ Hackett","year":"1987","unstructured":"Hackett, E. J. (1987). Funding and academic research in the life sciences: Results of an exploratory study. Science & Technology Studies, 5(3\/4), 134\u2013147. \nhttps:\/\/www.jstor.org\/stable\/690435\n.","journal-title":"Science & Technology Studies"},{"key":"467_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"scac067","DOI":"10.1093\/scipol\/scac067","volume":"50","author":"R Hastings","year":"2022","unstructured":"Hastings, R., Labib, K., Lechner, I., Bouter, L., Widdershoven, G., & Evans, N. (2022). Guidance on research integrity provided by pan-European discipline-specific learned societies: A scoping review. Science and Public Policy, 50, scac067. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/scipol\/scac067","journal-title":"Science and Public Policy"},{"key":"467_CR25","unstructured":"Hesselberth, P. (2020). On leaving academia and the need to take refuge. In J. de Bloois (Ed.), Politics of withdrawal: media, art, theory (pp. 147\u2013160). Rowman & Littlefield. Retrieved from https:\/\/hdl.handle.net\/1887\/3243720"},{"key":"467_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1461","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-016-9858-y","volume":"23","author":"SPJM Horbach","year":"2017","unstructured":"Horbach, S. P. J. M., & Halffman, W. (2017). Promoting virtue or punishing fraud: Mapping contrasts in the language of \u2018scientific integrity.\u2019 Science and Engineering Ethics, 23, 1461\u20131485. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11948-016-9858-y","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"},{"key":"467_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e124","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pmed.0020124","volume":"2","author":"JPA Ioannidis","year":"2005","unstructured":"Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. PLOS Medicine, 2, e124. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pmed.0020124","journal-title":"PLOS Medicine"},{"issue":"5","key":"467_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"483","DOI":"10.1001\/jama.2014.6932","volume":"312","author":"JPA Ioannidis","year":"2014","unstructured":"Ioannidis, J. P. A., & Khoury, M. J. (2014). Assessing value in biomedical research: The PQRST of Appraisal and Reward. JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association, 312(5), 483\u2013484. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1001\/jama.2014.6932","journal-title":"JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association"},{"issue":"5","key":"467_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"524","DOI":"10.1177\/0956797611430953","volume":"23","author":"LK John","year":"2012","unstructured":"John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2012). Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychological Science, 23(5), 524\u2013532. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/0956797611430953","journal-title":"Psychological Science"},{"key":"467_CR30","unstructured":"Juurik, M., Gonz\u00e1lez Fuster, G., Simm, K., Velbaum, K., L\u00f5uk, K., Parder, M.L., Sutrop M. (2018). D 5.1 Policy brief for science policy makers and research managers. In PRINTEGER. https:\/\/printeger.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/D5.1.pdf"},{"issue":"3","key":"467_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"340","DOI":"10.1080\/23299460.2020.1744401","volume":"7","author":"W Kaltenbrunner","year":"2020","unstructured":"Kaltenbrunner, W. (2020). Managing budgetary uncertainty, interpreting policy. How researchers integrate \u201cGrand Challenges\u201d Funding Programs into their research agendas. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 7(3), 340\u2013341. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/23299460.2020.1744401","journal-title":"Journal of Responsible Innovation"},{"key":"467_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-021-00322-9","volume":"27","author":"K Labib","year":"2021","unstructured":"Labib, K., Roje, R., Bouter, L., Widdershoven, G., Evans, N., Maru\u0161i\u0107, A., Mokkink, L., & Tijdink, J. (2021). Important topics for fostering research integrity by Research Performing and Research Funding Organizations: A Delphi consensus study. Science and Engineering Ethics, 27, 1\u201322. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11948-021-00322-9","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"},{"issue":"7","key":"467_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"489","DOI":"10.3152\/147154306781778777","volume":"3","author":"G Laudel","year":"2006","unstructured":"Laudel, G. (2006). The art of getting funded: How scientists adapt to their funding conditions. Science and Public Policy, 3(7), 489\u2013504. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3152\/147154306781778777","journal-title":"Science and Public Policy"},{"key":"467_CR34","unstructured":"Leeuwen T. van., Reyes Elizondo, A., Rijcke, S. de., Wouters, P. (2018). D 5.3 Policy brief for scientific and scholarly publishers. PRINTEGER. http:\/\/printeger.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/D.5.3.pdf"},{"key":"467_CR35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"143","DOI":"10.1007\/978-94-6091-555-0_9","volume-title":"Reform of Higher Education in Europe","author":"L Leisyte","year":"2011","unstructured":"Leisyte, L., & Enders, J. (2011). The strategic responses of english and Dutch University Life Scientists to the changes in their Institutional Environments. In J. Enders, H. F. de Boer, & D. F. Westerheijden (Eds.), Reform of Higher Education in Europe (pp. 143\u2013157). Sense Publishers."},{"key":"467_CR36","unstructured":"Levelt, W. J. M., Drenth, P., & Noort, E. (eds.). (2012). Flawed science: The fraudulent research practices of social psychologist Diederik Stapel. Commissioned by the Tilburg University, University of Amsterdam and the University of Groningen. https:\/\/www.tilburguniversity.edu\/sites\/default\/files\/download\/Final%20report%20Flawed%20Science_2.pdf"},{"key":"467_CR37","volume-title":"State of insecurity: government of the precarious","author":"I Lorey","year":"2015","unstructured":"Lorey, I. (2015). State of insecurity: government of the precarious. Verso."},{"issue":"2","key":"467_CR38","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"171","DOI":"10.1242\/dmm.015123","volume":"7","author":"N Matosin","year":"2014","unstructured":"Matosin, N., Frank, E., Engel, M., Lum, J. S., & Newell, K. A. (2014). Negativity towards negative results: A discussion of the disconnect between scientific worth and scientific culture. Disease Models & Mechanisms, 7(2), 171\u2013173. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1242\/dmm.015123","journal-title":"Disease Models & Mechanisms"},{"issue":"11","key":"467_CR39","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"3993","DOI":"10.1172\/jci84722","volume":"125","author":"N Mazar","year":"2015","unstructured":"Mazar, N., & Ariely, D. (2015). Dishonesty in scientific research. The Journal of Clinical Investigation, 125(11), 3993\u20133996. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1172\/jci84722","journal-title":"The Journal of Clinical Investigation"},{"issue":"7829","key":"467_CR40","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"358","DOI":"10.1038\/d41586-020-02847-8","volume":"586","author":"N Mejlgaard","year":"2020","unstructured":"Mejlgaard, N., Bouter, L. M., Gaskell, G., Kavouras, P., Allum, N., Bendtsen, A. K., Charitidis, C. A., Claesen, N., Dierickx, K., Domaradzka, A., Reyes Elizondo, A., Foeger, N., Hiney, M., Kaltenbrunner, W., Labib, K., Maru\u0161i\u0107, A., S\u00f8rensen, M. P., Ravn, T., \u0160\u010depanovi\u0107, R., & Veltri, G. A. (2020). Research integrity: Nine ways to move from talk to walk. Nature, 586(7829), 358\u2013360. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/d41586-020-02847-8","journal-title":"Nature"},{"issue":"7","key":"467_CR41","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"e3000737","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pbio.3000737","volume":"18","author":"D Moher","year":"2020","unstructured":"Moher, D., Bouter, L., Kleinert, S., Glasziou, P., Sham, M. H., Barbour, V., Coriat, A. M., Foeger, N., & Dirnagl, U. (2020). The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity. PLoS Biology, 18(7), e3000737. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pbio.3000737","journal-title":"PLoS Biology"},{"key":"467_CR42","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"M\u00fcller, R. (2014). Racing for what? Anticipation and acceleration in the work and career practices of academic life science postdocs. In Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol. 15 no. 3. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.17169\/fqs-15.3.2245","DOI":"10.17169\/fqs-15.3.2245"},{"key":"467_CR43","unstructured":"National Health and Medical Research Council, Australian Research Council and Universities Australia. (2018). Guide to Managing and Investigating Potential Breaches of the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research. https:\/\/www.nhmrc.gov.au\/sites\/default\/files\/documents\/reports\/guide-managing-investigating-potential-breaches.pdf"},{"key":"467_CR44","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"OECD. (2021). Reducing the precarity of academic research careers. In OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 113. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1787\/0f8bd468-en","DOI":"10.1787\/0f8bd468-en"},{"key":"467_CR45","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. In Science. Vol. 349, no. 6251, (pp. aac4716). https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1126\/science.aac4716","DOI":"10.1126\/science.aac4716"},{"key":"467_CR46","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7312\/pard19780","volume-title":"The quantified scholar","author":"JP Pardo-Guerra","year":"2022","unstructured":"Pardo-Guerra, J. P. (2022). The quantified scholar. Columbia University Press."},{"key":"467_CR47","volume-title":"Qualitative evaluation and research methods","author":"MQ Patton","year":"1990","unstructured":"Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.","edition":"2"},{"key":"467_CR48","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.31219\/osf.io\/8zj9w","volume-title":"Describing key preprint review features","author":"J Polka","year":"2022","unstructured":"Polka, J., Puebla, I., Pattinson, D., Hurst, P., McDowell, G. S., Sever, R., Avissar-Whiting, M., Cohen, P. N., Ross-Hellauer, T., Stein, G., Shearer, K., Stone, C., & Tan, V. T. (2022). Describing key preprint review features. OSF Preprints. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.31219\/osf.io\/8zj9w"},{"key":"467_CR49","unstructured":"PRINTEGER. (2018). Upright. https:\/\/printeger.eu\/upright\/"},{"issue":"4","key":"467_CR50","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"40","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-021-00310-z","volume":"27","author":"T Ravn","year":"2021","unstructured":"Ravn, T., & S\u00f8rensen, M. (2021). Exploring the gray area: Similarities and differences in questionable research practices (QRPs) across main areas of research. Science and Engineering Ethics, 27(4), 40. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11948-021-00310-z","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"},{"issue":"5","key":"467_CR51","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1321","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-018-0065-x","volume":"25","author":"D Sacco","year":"2019","unstructured":"Sacco, D., Brown, M., & Bruton, S. V. (2019). Grounds for ambiguity: Justifiable bases for engaging in questionable research practices. Science and Engineering Ethics, 25(5), 1321\u20131337. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11948-018-0065-x","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"},{"key":"467_CR21","unstructured":"Secretariat on Responsible Conduct of Research. (2021). Tri-Agency Framework. Responsible Conduct of Research. Ottawa, Ontario. https:\/\/rcr.ethics.gc.ca\/eng\/framework-cadre-2021.html"},{"issue":"3","key":"467_CR52","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"347","DOI":"10.1177\/0162243915599069[anonymized]","volume":"41","author":"L Sigl","year":"2016","unstructured":"Sigl, L. (2016). On the Tacit Governance of research by uncertainty: How early stage researchers contribute to the Governance of life science research. Science, Technology & Human Values, 41(3), 347\u2013374. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/0162243915599069[anonymized]","journal-title":"Science, Technology & Human Values"},{"key":"467_CR53","unstructured":"SOPS4RI. (2022). Toolbox for Research Integrity. https:\/\/sops4ri.eu\/toolbox\/"},{"key":"467_CR67","unstructured":"S\u00f8rensen, M. P., Ravn, T., Bendtsen, A.-K., Reyes Elizondo, A., Kaltenbrunner, W., \u0160\u0107epanovi\u0107, R., et al. (2020). D5.2: Report on the results of the focus group interviews. SOPs4RI.. https:\/\/sops4ri.eu\/wp-content\/uploads\/D5.2_Report-on-the-Results-of-the-Focus-Group-Interviews-2.pdf"},{"key":"467_CR55","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1057\/s41599-021-00874-y","author":"MP S\u00f8rensen","year":"2021","unstructured":"S\u00f8rensen, M. P., Ravn, T., Maru\u0161i\u0107, A., Elizondo, A. R., Kavouras, P., Tijdink, J. K., & Bendtsen, A. K. (2021). Strengthening research integrity: which topic areas should organisations focus on? Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1057\/s41599-021-00874-y","journal-title":"Humanities and Social Sciences Communications"},{"key":"467_CR54","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"S\u00f8rensen, M. P., Mejlgaard, N., Ravn, T., Charitidis, C. A., Marusic, A., Buljan, I., et al. (2023). Focus group interviews (WP5). \nhttps:\/\/doi.org\/10.17605\/OSF.IO\/E9U8T\n.","DOI":"10.17605\/OSF.IO\/E9U8T"},{"issue":"1","key":"467_CR56","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"53","DOI":"10.1007\/pl00022268","volume":"12","author":"NH Steneck","year":"2006","unstructured":"Steneck, N. H. (2006). Fostering integrity in research: Definitions, current knowledge, and future directions. Science and Engineering Ethics, 12(1), 53\u201374. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/pl00022268","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"},{"key":"467_CR57","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"12","DOI":"10.1186\/s12952-015-0033-9","volume":"14","author":"JA Teixeira da Silva","year":"2015","unstructured":"Teixeira da Silva, J. A. (2015). Negative results: Negative perceptions limit their potential for increasing reproducibility. Journal of Negative Results in Biomedicine, 14, 12. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12952-015-0033-9","journal-title":"Journal of Negative Results in Biomedicine"},{"issue":"1","key":"467_CR58","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"10","DOI":"10.1007\/s11948-021-00291-z","volume":"27","author":"G Valkenburg","year":"2021","unstructured":"Valkenburg, G., Dix, G., Tijdink, J., & de Rijcke, S. (2021). Expanding research integrity: A cultural-practice perspective. Science and Engineering Ethics, 27(1), 10. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11948-021-00291-z","journal-title":"Science and Engineering Ethics"},{"key":"467_CR59","unstructured":"Vogel, G. (2011). Report: Dutch 'Lord of the Data' Forged Dozens of Studies (UPDATE). Science. https:\/\/www.science.org\/content\/article\/report-dutch-lord-data-forged-dozens-studies-update"},{"key":"467_CR60","unstructured":"WCRI\u2014World Conference on Research Integrity. (2010). Singapore statement on research integrity. https:\/\/wcrif.org\/guidance\/singapore-statement"},{"key":"467_CR61","unstructured":"WCRI\u2014World Conference on Research Integrity. (2013). Montreal statement on research integrity in cross-boundary research collaborations. https:\/\/wcrif.org\/guidance\/montreal-statement"},{"key":"467_CR62","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/acprof:oso\/9780199590193.001.0001","volume-title":"Reconfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation","year":"2010","unstructured":"Whitley, R., Gl\u00e4ser, J., & Engwall, J. (Eds.). (2010). Reconfiguring knowledge production: Changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation. Oxford Academic. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/acprof:oso\/9780199590193.001.0001"},{"issue":"3","key":"467_CR63","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"333","DOI":"10.1007\/s10734-014-9714-4","volume":"68","author":"FA Zoller","year":"2014","unstructured":"Zoller, F. A., Zimmerling, E., & Boutellier, R. (2014). Assessing the impact of the funding environment on researchers\u2019 risk aversion: the use of citation statistics. Higher Education, 68(3), 333\u2013345.","journal-title":"Higher Education"}],"container-title":["Science and Engineering Ethics"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s11948-024-00467-3.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s11948-024-00467-3\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s11948-024-00467-3.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2024,4,23]],"date-time":"2024-04-23T11:50:43Z","timestamp":1713873043000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s11948-024-00467-3"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2024,4,3]]},"references-count":66,"journal-issue":{"issue":"2","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2024,4]]}},"alternative-id":["467"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11948-024-00467-3","relation":{},"ISSN":["1471-5546"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1471-5546","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2024,4,3]]},"assertion":[{"value":"4 April 2023","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"30 November 2023","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"3 April 2024","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Conflict of interest"}},{"value":"Ethical approval for the focus group interviews was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee at Aarhus University (ref. no 2019-0015957). In addition, a national approval was obtained in Croatia.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethical Approval"}},{"value":"The informed consent form followed the guidelines of Aarhus University. For the face-to-face interviews, consent forms were signed before the commencement of the interviews. For the online focus group interviews, consent was given verbally and subsequently provided in a written version.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Informed Consent"}}],"article-number":"12"}}