Abstract
This chapter explores the evolving landscape of authorship conventions and ethical considerations in contemporary behavioral sciences research, highlighting the shift from sole authorship to collaborative efforts and the challenges associated with it. Emphasizing the critical importance of collecting reliable and valid data, the chapter examines various types of reliability and validity evidence while providing practical guidance for ensuring data quality. It also discusses strategies for drawing supported conclusions that justify research claims and facilitate effective dissemination. In the realm of authorship conventions, the chapter delves into complexities surrounding author order, its impact on careers and funding, and the need for transparent practices. Additionally, it addresses faculty–student collaborations, citation practices, and ethical considerations related to open access citations, ultimately promoting the integrity and ethical conduct of behavioral sciences research. Specifically, the chapter outlines the principles of integrity and ethical conduct within the sphere of behavioral sciences research, reinforcing the evolving standards and practices in this dynamic field.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Addey, C., Maddox, B., & Zumbo, B. D. (2020). Assembled validity: Rethinking Kane’s argument-based approach in the context of International Large-Scale Assessments(ILSAs). Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(6), 588–606.
American Psychological Association. (2019). Publication manual of the American psychological association. American Psychological Association.
Arias, V. B., Garrido, L. E., Jenaro, C., Martínez-Molina, A., & Arias, B. (2020). A little garbage in, lots of garbage out: Assessing the impact of careless responding in personality survey data. Behavior Research Methods, 52(6), 2489–2505.
Ashby, M. (2020). Three quarters of new criminological knowledge is hidden from policy makers. https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/wnq7h/
Caswell, T., Henson, S., Jensen, M., & Wiley, D. (2008). Open educational resources: Enabling universal education. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(1), 1–11.
Cooke, S. J., Young, N., Donaldson, M. R., Nyboer, E. A., Roche, D. G., Madliger, C. L., Lennox, R. J., Chapman, J. M., Faulkes, Z., & Bennett, J. R. (2021). Ten strategies for avoiding and overcoming authorship conflicts in academic publishing. FACETS, 6, 1753–1770. https://scholarworks.utrgv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1177&context=bio_fac
Dotson, B., McManus, K. P., Zhao, J. J., & Whittaker, P. (2011). Authorship and characteristics of articles in pharmacy journals: Changes over a 20-year interval. Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 45(3), 357–363.
Farrow, R. (2016). A framework for the ethics of open education. Open Praxis, 8(2), 93–109. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1103941.pdf
Frechtling, J., & Westat, J. S. (1997). User friendly handbook for mixed method evaluations. National Science Foundation. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1997/nsf97153/start.htm
García-Pérez, M. A. (2012). Statistical conclusion validity: Some common threats and simple remedies. Frontiers in Psychology, 29. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00325
Giuliano, T. A. (2019). Guiding undergraduates through the process of first authorship. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00857
Hayes, A. F., & Coutts, J. J. (2020). Use omega rather than Cronbach’s alpha for estimating reliability. But….Communication Methods and Measures, 14(1), 1–24.
Heale, R., & Twycross, A. (2015). Validity and reliability in quantitative studies. Evidence-Based Nursing, 18(3), 66–67.
Hester, N., Axt, J. R., Siemers, N., & Hehman, E. (2022). Evaluating validity properties of 25 race-related scales. Behavior Research Methods, 1–20.
HHS (2005). [1947]. The Nuremberg Code. U.S. Department of Human and Health Sciences. http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/archive/nurcode.html
Ijzerman, H., Lewis, N. A., Jr., Przybylski, A. K., Weinstein, N., DeBruine, L., Ritchie, S. J., Vazire, S., Forscher, P. S., Morey, R. D., Ivory, J. D., & Anvari, F. (2020). Use caution when applying behavioural science to policy. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(11), 1092–1094. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-00990-w
Jabbehdari, S., & Walsh, J. P. (2017). Authorship norms and project structures in science. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 42, 872–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243917697192
Johann, D. (2022). Perceptions of scientific authorship revisited: Country differences and the impact of perceived publication pressure. Science and Engineering Ethics, 10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00356-z
Kane, M. T. (2016). Explicating validity. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 23(2), 198–211.
Koepsell, D. (2017). Scientific integrity and research ethics: An approach from the ethos of science. Springer.
Lambert, S. R. (2018). Changing our (dis) course: A distinctive social justice aligned definition of open education. Journal of Learning for Development, 5(3). https://jl4d.org/index.php/ejl4d/article/view/290
Lawrence, P. A. (2007). The mismeasurement of science. Current Biology, 17, 583–585.
LoBiondo-Wood, G., & Haber, J. (2021). Methods and critical appraisal for evidence-based practice. Elsevier.
Lortie, C. J., Aarssen, L. W., Budden, A. E., & Leimu, R. (2013). Do citations and impact factors relate to the real numbers in publications? A case study of citation rates, impact, and effect sizes in ecology and evolutionary biology. Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing, 94, 675–682. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0822-6
Madhok, R., Frank, E., & Heller, R. (2018). Building public health capacity through online global learning. Open Praxis, 10(1), 91–97. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/182379/
Mahmoudi, M. (2019). Academic bullies leave no trace. BioImpacts: BI, 9(3), 129–130.
Miles, S., Renedo, A., & Marston, C. (2021). Reimagining authorship guidelines to promote equity in co-produced academic collaborations. Global Public Health, 17(10), 2547–2559. https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2021.1971277
Pruschak, G. (2021). What constitutes authorship? Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 6, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2021.655350
Tackett, S., Torres, K. M., Arrastia, M. C., & Bradt, S. W. (2021). Breaching the paywall: Increasing access, recognition, and representation using open educational resources. In I. Jaafar & J. M. Pedersen (Eds), Emerging realities and the future of technology in the classroom (pp. 222–241). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-6480-6.ch013
Teixeira da Silva, J. A., & Dobránszki, J. (2016). Multiple authorship in scientific manuscripts: Ethical challenges, ghost and guest/gift authorship, and the cultural/disciplinary perspective. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22(5), 1457–1472.
Watkins, M. W., & Pacheco, M. (2000). Interobserver agreement in behavioral research: Importance and calculation. Journal of Behavioral Education, 10(4), 205–212.
Wilhite, A., Fong, E. A., & Wilhite, S. (2019). The influence of editorial decisions and the academic network on self-citations and journal impact factors. Research Policy, 48(6), 1513–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2019.03.003
Williams, J., & Gregory, B. (2012). Open education resources for interprofessional working. British Journal of Midwifery, 20(6), 436–439. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjom.2012.20.6.436
Zauner, H., Nogoy, N. A., Edmunds, S. C., Zhou, H., & Goodman, L. (2018). Editorial: We need to talk about authorship. Giga Science, 7(12). https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giy122
Zhu, W. (2013). Reliability: What type, please. Journal of Sport and Health Science, 2(1), 62–64.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Torres, K.M., Arrastía-Chisholm, M.C., Tackett, S. (2023). Ethical Dissemination. In: Griffith, A.K., Ré, T.C. (eds) Disseminating Behavioral Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47343-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47343-2_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-47342-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-47343-2
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)