Conduta antiética na pesquisa científica: prevalência, causas associadas e estratégias de prevenção. Uma revisão sistemática
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22458/ie.v24iEspecial.4312Palavras-chave:
fraude acadêmica, pesquisa, docentes acadêmicos, pesquisadores científicos, ética da ciência, estratégias de pesquisa, conluio, educaçãoResumo
O plágio tem sido objeto de pesquisa há alguns anos; no entanto, tem sido estudado principalmente entre estudantes de diferentes níveis educacionais, embora seja uma prática que também se manifesta na pesquisa científica. Por esta razão, este artigo se baseia nas seguintes perguntas: Qual é a prevalência do plágio entre os pesquisadores? quais são as principais causas associadas que levam a cometer plágio? e quais estratégias são usadas para prevenir o plágio? Foi realizada uma revisão sistemática da literatura. Um total de 25 trabalhos foram avaliados, analisados e sintetizados. Os resultados indicam que a prevalência estimada de plágio é de 4,3% internacionalmente, a percentagem está abaixo da prática real devido ao viés de resposta: alguns pesquisadores podem não estar relatando plágio em sua prática de pesquisa, mesmo quando participam anonimamente da pesquisa. A principal razão associada ao plágio é a falta de tempo, relacionada ao excesso de trabalho e à pressão para ser promovido. As estratégias de prevenção estão agrupadas em três: implementação de treinamento, criação ou modificação de políticas e documentos. A revisão, embora originalmente focalizada no plágio, acrescenta informações sobre outras práticas antiéticas de pesquisa. Conclui-se que o plágio, apesar de sua aparente baixa prevalência, é um fenômeno grave presente na pesquisa científica, que requer uma definição clara e completa para ser aceito internacionalmente, além disso, precisa ser estudado em maior escala e com diferentes metodologias. São sugeridas novas linhas de pesquisa e convida-se a analisar as estratégias de prevenção coletadas.
Referências
Abad-García, M. F. (2019). Plagiarism and predatory journals: A threat to scientific integrity. Anales de Pediatría, 90(1), 57.e1-57.e8. https://bit.ly/2KD6eD5
American Educational Research Association (2011). Code of Ethics. https://bit.ly/2y7c9uS
American Psychological Association (2020). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association [7.a ed.]. Autor.
Antes, A. L.; English, T.; Baldwin, K. A. y DuBois, J. M. (2018). The Role of Culture and Acculturation in Researchers’ Perceptions of Rules in Science. Science and Engineering Ethics, 24(2), 361-391. https://bit.ly/3RgP7aU
Awasthi, S. (2019). Plagiarism and Academic Misconduct: A Systematic Review. Journal of Library & information Technology, 39(2), 94-100.
Bishop’s University (s. f.). Departmental Policies & Resources. https://bit.ly/3DMUMSM
Bouter, L. (2020). What Research Institutions Can Do to Foster Research Integrity. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(4), 2363-2369. https://bit.ly/3fg3bnq
Camacho Sandoval, S. (2016). La luz y el caracol. Estudio, lucha y placer en la universidad. Universidad Autónoma de Aguascalientes.
Carlo, F. C. (2010). Plagiarism Within the Legal Profession and Academe. Ateneo Law Journal, 55, 787-818.
Codina, L. (2018). Revisiones bibliográficas sistematizadas. Procedimientos generales y Framework para Ciencias Humanas y Sociales. Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
Colella Sandercock, J. (2016). Self-Reporting in Plagiarism Research: How Honest is This Approach? Journal of Research Practice, 12(2), 1-5.
Committee on Publication Ethics (s. f.). Plagiarism. https://bit.ly/3S8to67
Committee on Publication Ethics (2019). A COPE STUDY (2019): ExPloring Publication ethics issues in the Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences. https://bit.ly/3DOgKot
Emerson, L. (2008). Plagiarism, a Turnitin trial, and an experience of cultural disorientation. Originality, Imitation, and Plagiarism: Teaching Writing in the Digital Age, 183-194. https://bit.ly/3R9jgc7
Emerson, L.; MacKay, B. y Rees, M. (2014). Plagiarism in the science classroom: Misunderstandings and models. 1-13. https://bit.ly/3ffBGdE
Foltýnek, T.; Gipp, B. y Meuschke, N. (2019). Academic Plagiarism Detection: A Systematic Literature Review. ACM Computing Surveys, 52(6), 112:1-112:42. https://bit.ly/3R6BAT1
Felaefel, M.; Salem, M.; Jaafar, R.; Ali, N. M. y Silverman, H. (2018). A Cross-Sectional Survey Study to Assess Prevalence and Attitudes Regarding Research Misconduct among Investigators in the Middle East. Journal of Academic Ethics, 16(1), 71-87. https://bit.ly/3R2mgqw
Galaz, J.; Padilla, L. y Gil, M. (2008). Los dilemas del profesorado en la educación superior mexicana. Calidad en la Educación, 28, 54-69. https://bit.ly/3UKLWv0
Gantús, F. (2016). Conocimientos colectivos, obras particulares. Algunas reflexiones en torno al plagio académico. Perfiles Educativos, XXXVIII(154), 12-19. https://bit.ly/3S7lytB
Gopalakrishna, G.; Ter Riet, G.; Vink, G.; Stoop, I.; Wicherts, J. M. y Bouter, L. M. (2022). Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in the Netherlands. PloS ONE, 17, 1-16. https://bit.ly/3fikGnr
Gray, G. C.; Borkenhagen, L. K.; Sung, N. S. y Tang, S. (2019). A Primer on Plagiarism: Resources for Educators in China. Change, 51(2), 55-62. Academic Search Ultimate. https://bit.ly/3R8dEyA
Hernández Islas, M. (2016). El plagio académico en la investigación científica. Consideraciones desde la óptica del investigador de alto nivel. Perfiles Educativos, XXXVIII(153), 120-135. https://bit.ly/3S7oENT
Houdek, P. (2017). Professional Identity and Dishonest Behavior. Society, 54(3), 253-260. Academic Search Ultimate. https://bit.ly/3fhdsjd
Institución Pública. Nicolae Testemitanu Universidad Estatal de Medicina y Farmacia de la República de Moldova. (2015). https://bit.ly/3nqZSLc
Jereb, E.; Perc, M., Lämmlein, B.; Jerebic, J.; Urh, M.; Podbregar, I. y Šprajc. (2018). Factors influencing plagiarism in higher education: A comparison of German and Slovene students. PloS ONE, 13(8), 1-16. https://bit.ly/3LBTpbs
Kaiser, M.; Drivdal, L.; Hjellbrekke, J.; Ingierd, H. y Rekdal, O. B. (2022). Questionable Research Practices and Misconduct Among Norwegian Researchers. Science and Engineering Ethics, 28(2), 1-31. https://bit.ly/3SvVaJF
Khairuldin, W. M. K. F. W.; Anas, W. N. I. W. N.; Kamarudin, M. K. A. y Embong, A. H. (2022). Ethical Issues in Academic Authorship: A Study on Group Writing. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 11(1), 226-231. https://bit.ly/3Ut8ss9
Le Maux, B.; Necker, S. y Rocaboy, Y. (2019). Cheat or perish? A theory of scientific customs. Research Policy, 48(9), 1-12.
Lei, J. y Hu, G. (2014). Chinese University EFL teachers’ perceptions of plagiarism. High Educ, 70, 551-565.
Lei, L. y Zhang, Y. (2018). Lack of Improvement in Scientific Integrity: An Analysis of WoS Retractions by Chinese Researchers (1997-2016). Science & Engineering Ethics, 24(5), 1409-1420. Academic Search Ultimate. https://bit.ly/3feCJLd
Maggio, L.; Dong, T.; Driessen, E. y Artino Jr, A. (2019). Factors associated with scientific misconduct and questionable research practices in health professions education. Perspectives on Medical Education, 8(2), 74-82. https://bit.ly/3xMJIkC
Memon, A. R. y Mavrinac, M. (2020). Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Plagiarism as Reported by Participants Completing the AuthorAID MOOC on Research Writing. Science & Engineering Ethics, 26(2), 1067-1088. Academic Search Ultimate. https://bit.ly/3xNB3id
Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J. y Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. BMJ, 1-8.
Mondragón Barrios, L.; Jiménez Tapia, J. A.; Meza Mercado, D. M. y Sosa Mora, L. (2017). Regulation and self-regulation of ethical practices in scientific publication. Salud mental, 40(5), 227-234. https://bit.ly/3dBgD58
Moss, S. A.; White, B. y Lee, J. (2018). A Systematic Review into the Psychological Causes and Correlates of Plagiarism. Ethics & Behavior, 28(4), 261-283. https://bit.ly/3St2zJD
Moylan, E. C. y Kowalczuk, M. K. (2016). Why articles are retracted: A retrospective cross-sectional study of retraction notices at BioMed Central. BMJ Open, 6(11), 1-6.
Ocholla, D. y Ocholla, L. (2016). Does Open Access Prevent Plagiarism in Higher Education? Afr. J. Lib. Arch. & Inf. Sc., 26(2), 187-200. https://bit.ly/3fczKCP
Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), (s. f.). Plagiarism. https://bit.ly/3dBcBK2
Ordóñez Torres, K. y Tarasco Michel, M. (2018). Retracción de artículos biomédicos y sus implicaciones éticas. Revista Latinoamericana de Bioética, 18(2), 100-125. https://bit.ly/3xM5mWc
Pandita, R. y Singh, S. (2019). Regulations to prevent plagiarism in higher education in India: A critical appraisal. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology, 39(2), 67-73. https://bit.ly/3DMaIor
Popoveniuc, B. (2018). Plagiarism and the Crisis of Higher Education. Revista Românească pentru Educaţie Multidimensională, 10(3), 1-5. https://bit.ly/3LHBDDF
Real Academia Española (2014). Plagio. En Diccionario de la Lengua Española [vigésimo tercera]. https://bit.ly/3SjoJxU
Roig, M. (1997). Can undergraduate students determine whether text has been plagiarized? Psychological Record, 47(1), 113-122. https://bit.ly/3LHBQqr
Roig, M. (2001). Plagiarism and Paraphrasing Criteria of College and University Professors. Ethics & Behavior, 11(3), 307-323. https://bit.ly/3feEjg7
Roje, R.; Tomić, V.; Buljan, I. y Marušić, A. (2021). Development and implementation of research integrity guidance documents: Explorative interviews with research integrity experts. Accountability in Research, 29(3), 1-39. https://bit.ly/3dEl66Q
Ruipérez, G. y García Cabrero, J. C. (2016). Plagiarism and Academic Integrity in Germany. Comunicar, XXIV(48), 9-17. https://bit.ly/3fiBZ7u
Satalkar, P. y Shaw, D. (2019). How do researchers acquire and develop notions of research integrity? A qualitative study among biomedical researchers in Switzerland. Medical Ethics, 20(72), 1-12. https://bit.ly/3Sg6vOk
Schonhaut, B. L. (2019). Integrity and misconduct in biomedical research [Integridad y conductas inapropiadas en investigación biomédica]. Revista Chilena de Pediatría, 90(2), 217-221. https://bit.ly/3fdPo0K
Singh, R. y Kumar, S. (2019). Information literacy competency level of social science researchers with respect to information use ethics: A study. DESIDOC Journal of Library and Information Technology, 39(2), 101-108. https://bit.ly/3DTYryp
Smith, E.; Williams-Jones, B.; Master, Z.; Shi, M. y Resnik, D. B. (2020). Misconduct and Misbehavior Related to Authorship Disagreements in Collaborative Science. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(4), 1967-1993. https://bit.ly/3RdpK9I
Šprajc, P.; Urh, M.; Jerebic, J.; Trivan, D. y Jereb, E. (2017). Reasons for Plagiarism in Higher Education. Organizacija, 50(1), 33-46. https://bit.ly/3SxDcXf
Solís Vargas, Y. G. (2022). El desarrollo de la moral desde la pedagogía de la autonomía de Paulo Freire. Innovaciones Educativas, 24(37), 277-286. https://bit.ly/3BJ6oU2
Thiese, M. S.; Walker, S. y Lindsey, J. (2017). Truths, lies, and statistics. Journal of Thoracic Disease, 9(10), 4117-4124. https://bit.ly/3r828sk
Turnitin (2021). ¿Qué es la integridad académica y por qué es importante? Una guía gratuita de Turnitin. Autor.
Universidad de Cambridge (s. f.). Plagiarism and Academic Misconduct. https://bit.ly/3S7lqKh
Vuong, Q. -H. (2018). “How did researchers get it so wrong?” The acute problem of plagiarism in Vietnamese social sciences and humanities. European Science Editing, 44(3), 56-58. https://bit.ly/3RaBkm1
Vehviläinen, S.; Löfström, E. y Nevgi, A. (2017). Dealing with plagiarism in the academic community: Emotional engagement and moral distress. High Educ, 75, 1-18. https://bit.ly/3C7rLA9
Vera, H. (2016). El plagio y la autonomía de las instituciones académicas. Perfiles Educativos, XXXVIII(154), 28-35. https://bit.ly/3dHzzin
Weber-Wulff, D. (2014). False Feathers. A Perspective on Academic Plagiarism. Springer.
Yankelevich, J. (2016). Mapas prestados para entender el plagio académico. Perfiles Educativos, XXXVIII(154), 20-27. https://bit.ly/3fexKtT
Yeo-Teh, N. S. L. y Tang, B. L. (2021). Research ethics courses as a vaccination against a toxic research environment or culture. Research Ethics, 17(1), 55-65. https://bit.ly/3UzbFX7
Yi, N.; Nemery, B. y Dierickx, K. (2019). Integrity in Biomedical Research: A Systematic Review of Studies in China. Science & Engineering Ethics, 25(4), 1271-1301. Academic Search Ultimate. https://bit.ly/3fjvMIQ
Yi, N.; Nemery, B. y Dierickx, K. (2020). Perceptions of plagiarism by biomedical researchers: An online survey in Europe and China. BMC Medical Ethics, 21(44), 1-16. https://bit.ly/3dJQ4ul
Zhou, S.; Xu, Z.; Han, J.; Sun, X. y Cao, Y. (2022). An Academic Misconduct Detection Method for Authors’ Behaviors. Computers, Materials & Continua, 71(3), 5995-6009. https://bit.ly/3S7yEXK
Zimba, O. y Gasparyan, A.Y. (2021). Plagiarism detection and prevention: A primer for researchers. Reumatologia, 59(3), 132-137. https://bit.ly/3r3ETzS
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Secção
Licença
Direitos de Autor (c) 2022 Innovaciones Educativas
Este trabalho encontra-se publicado com a Licença Internacional Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-SemDerivações 4.0.