nep-sog New Economics Papers
on Sociology of Economics
Issue of 2020‒04‒27
two papers chosen by
Jonas Holmström
Axventure AB

  1. Important topics for fostering research integrity by research performing and research funding organizations – A Delphi consensus study By Labib, Krishma; Scepanovic, Rea; Bouter, Lex; Widdershoven, Guy; Evans, Natalie; Marusic, Ana; Mokkink, Lidwine; Tijdink, Joeri K.
  2. FUNDAMENTAL AND APPLIED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH (ICFARS) March 2020: сб.науч.тр./ RELF Group&OEAPS Inc.; редкол.: Флора Бертран (отв.ред.) [и др.]. - Берлин, Германия : OEAPS Inc., 2020. - 118 C. ISBN: 9798632493109 By , OEAPS

  1. By: Labib, Krishma; Scepanovic, Rea; Bouter, Lex; Widdershoven, Guy; Evans, Natalie; Marusic, Ana; Mokkink, Lidwine; Tijdink, Joeri K.
    Abstract: Background: To foster research integrity (RI), it is necessary to address the institutional and system-of-science factors that influence researchers’ behavior. Consequently, research performing and research funding organizations (RPOs and RFOs) should develop RI promotion plans (RIPPs) outlining the concrete steps they will take to foster RI. So far, there is no consensus on which topics are important to address in RIPPs. This study aimed to explore which RI topics to address in RIPPs by seeking consensus from research policy experts and institutional leaders. Additionally, we aimed to rank the identified RI topics in priority. Methods: We employed a three round Delphi study to reach our objectives. Delphi studies include a series (‘rounds’) of questionnaires. To achieve consensus, results are fed back to respondents between subsequent rounds. In Round 1, we asked research policy experts to rate the importance of RI topics on a 1-5 scale. In Round 2, they were asked to rank the topics, which received consensus on importance, in order of priority to be included in RIPPs. In Round 3, experts were asked to provide answers to open-ended questions about the rationale behind the rankings in the previous round. Results: A total of 68 RPO and 52 RFO experts, representing different disciplines, countries and genders, completed one, two or all rounds of the Delphi study. There was consensus among the experts on the importance of 12 RI topics for RPOs and 11 for RFOs (67% agreement on ratings 4-5). The topics that ranked highest for RPOs concerned education and training, supervision and mentoring, supporting a responsible research process (e.g. through quality assurance), and dealing with RI breaches. The highest ranked RFO topics concerned dealing with breaches of RI, conflicts of interest and setting expectations on RPOs (e.g. about educating researchers about RI). Conclusions: Together with research policy experts and institutional leaders, we developed a comprehensive overview of topics important for inclusion in RIPPs of RPOs and RFOs. The topics reflect a clear preference for a preventative approach to RI, coupled with fair procedures for dealing with RI breaches. Study pre-registration:
    Date: 2020–04–07
  2. By: , OEAPS
    Abstract: Conference paper Covered by Leading Indexing Databases Open European Academy of Public Sciences aims to have all of its journals covered by the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) and Scopus and Web of Science indexing systems. Several journals have already been covered by SCIE for several years and have received official Impact Factors. Some life science related journals are also covered by PubMed/MEDLINE and archived through PubMed Central (PMC). All of our journals are archived with the Spanish and Germany National Library.All Content is Open Access and Free for Readers Journals published by Open European Academy of Public Sciences are fully open access: research articles, reviews or any other content on this platform is available to everyone free of charge. To be able to provide open access journals, we finance publication through article processing charges (APC); these are usually covered by the authors’ institutes or research funding bodies. We offer access to science and the latest research to readers for free. All of our content is published in open access and distributed under a Creative Commons License, which means published articles can be freely shared and the content reused, upon proper attribution. Open European Academy of Public Sciences Publication Ethics StatementOpen European Academy of Public Sciences is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Open European Academy of Public Sciences takes the responsibility to enforce a rigorous peerreview together with strict ethical policies and standards to ensure to add high quality scientific works to the field of scholarly publication. Unfortunately, cases of plagiarism, data falsification, inappropriate authorship credit, and the like, do arise. Open European Academy of Public Sciences takes such publishing ethics issues very seriously and our editors are trained to proceed in such cases with a zero tolerance policy. To verify the originality of content submitted to our journals, we use iThenticate to check submissions against previous publications.Mission and ValuesAs a pioneer of academic open access publishing, we serve the scientific community since 2009. Our aim is to foster scientific exchange in all forms, across all disciplines. In addition to being at the root of Open European Academy of Public Sciences and a key theme in our journals, we support sustainability by ensuring the longterm preservation of published papers, and the future of science through partnerships, sponsorships and awards.
    Date: 2020–04–10

This nep-sog issue is ©2020 by Jonas Holmström. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.