Pick One Of The Following Terms For Your Research: In 293911 ✓ Solved

Pick one of the following terms for your research: Integrity

Pick one of the following terms for your research: Integrity, ethical dilemma, conflict of interest, bribery, or fraud. For the selected term, find one recent (past 3 years) peer-reviewed academic journal article from Campbellsville University's online library that relates closely to the concept. Your submission must include: DEFINITION: a brief definition of the key term followed by the APA reference for the term (this does not count in word requirement). SUMMARY: Summarize the article in your own words, including the article's author(s), their credentials, and reasons to weigh their findings. DISCUSSION: A brief discussion in your own words of how the article relates to the selected key term; include your experiences, thoughts, and opinions. REFERENCES: List all references in APA format. The main body (SUMMARY + DISCUSSION) should be approximately 1000 words.

Paper For Above Instructions

Selected Key Term: Integrity

DEFINITION: Integrity (in research and professional practice) refers to adherence to moral and professional principles such as honesty, accuracy, transparency, accountability, and consistency in behavior. It encompasses avoiding fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism, disclosing conflicts of interest, and conducting and reporting research responsibly (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2017).

Note about the required peer-reviewed article: I do not have direct access to Campbellsville University’s online library to retrieve a specific, recent (past 3 years) peer-reviewed article on your behalf. Below is a model submission that demonstrates how to structure the required elements (definition, APA reference for the term, summary of an article, and discussion). Use this model to replace the exemplar article details with the actual article you locate in the Campbellsville library. Where I cite literature below, I draw on established, credible sources about research integrity (reports, books, and policy documents) to support the discussion.

SUMMARY (Model based on a representative recent article)

Article (example for structure only): "Promoting Research Integrity in Modern Teams" (Smith & Lee, 2023). [Note: replace this example with your actual article's citation and details from Campbellsville’s library before submission.]

Summary (model): Smith and Lee (2023) examine how team-based research environments influence researchers’ adherence to integrity norms. Using a mixed-methods design combining a cross-sectional survey of 437 early-career and senior researchers and 24 semi-structured interviews across multiple universities, the authors investigate factors that predict responsible conduct: team leadership behaviors, formal mentorship structures, institutional policies, and perceived incentives. Their statistical analysis found that explicit mentoring programs and transparent authorship agreements were associated with lower self-reported engagement in questionable research practices (QRPs). The qualitative interviews highlighted pressures to publish, lack of clarity about data ownership, and inconsistent enforcement of policies as persistent threats to integrity.

Author credentials and weight of evidence (model): The lead author, Dr. Alex Smith, is an associate professor of research ethics with a PhD in sociology of science and a record of peer-reviewed publications on research culture. Co-author Dr. Mia Lee is a senior analyst at a research integrity institute and has participated in policy development for institutional integrity programs. Their academic positions, peer-reviewed publication record, and use of mixed methods strengthen the credibility of their findings. The study’s sample size, methodological triangulation, and transparency about limitations (e.g., self-report bias) support cautious confidence in the conclusions (Smith & Lee, 2023).

DISCUSSION

Relation to the key term: The article’s core findings map directly onto the concept of integrity: integrity in research is not only an individual attribute but an emergent property of teams, leadership, and institutional structures (National Academies, 2017). The model article emphasizes that promoting integrity requires clear policies, mentored development, and agreed-upon authorship and data practices. This aligns with established guidance from research integrity authorities that stress systems-level supports as essential complements to individual ethics training (Steneck, 2006; Shamoo & Resnik, 2015).

Personal reflection and applied implications: From my experience working in collaborative research groups, the pressures described in the model study—deadlines, competitive funding, and ambiguous authorship norms—are real drivers of questionable behavior. I have observed teams where clear data-management protocols and transparent authorship discussions at project inception prevented misunderstandings later. Conversely, the absence of these practices led to tension and erosion of trust. Therefore, the article’s recommendation to institutionalize mentoring and create formal, written agreements resonates strongly: small, procedural changes (e.g., a written data-management plan and an authorship agreement) materially support integrity by reducing ambiguity and rationalization for unethical shortcuts.

Educational and policy applications: The findings suggest several actionable steps for universities and research teams. First, integrate formal mentorship training into faculty development programs so mentors can model and teach integrity practices. Second, require and audit project-level data-management and authorship agreements for externally funded projects. Third, align incentive structures to reward transparent practices (e.g., recognition for open data, reproducible workflows) instead of relying solely on publication counts. These steps are consistent with recommendations from the National Academies (2017) and UNESCO (2017) and can be implemented incrementally to create a culture that supports integrity.

Limitations and next steps: The model article relies partly on self-report, which can under- or over-estimate QRPs. Future research should combine survey data with audit-type assessments (e.g., reproducibility checks, data audits) and evaluate the effectiveness of specific interventions over time. For a student assignment, after identifying your Campbellsville library article, explicitly compare its methods and findings to the institutional and international guidance cited below, and reflect on how local policies at your institution might be strengthened in light of the article.

How to adapt this model to your required submission

  • Locate and read one recent (past 3 years) peer-reviewed article on integrity from Campbellsville University's online library.
  • Replace the model article title, summary, and author-credential section with the actual article’s content: list authors, their institutional affiliations, degrees, and prior publications if relevant.
  • Write your discussion in your own words: connect the article’s results to the definition of integrity, reflect on how the findings align or conflict with your experiences, and propose concrete changes or applications.
  • List all references in APA format at the end; include the selected article plus relevant background sources.

References

  • National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Fostering integrity in research. The National Academies Press.
  • UNESCO. (2017). Recommendation on science and scientific researchers. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
  • Office of Research Integrity (ORI). (n.d.). Introduction to the responsible conduct of research. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. https://ori.hhs.gov/
  • Steneck, N. H. (2006). Fostering integrity in research: Definitions, current knowledge, and future directions. Science and Engineering Ethics, 12(1), 53–74.
  • Shamoo, A. E., & Resnik, D. B. (2015). Responsible conduct of research (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
  • Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2019). COPE Core Practices. https://publicationethics.org/
  • Bouter, L. M., Tijdink, J., Axelsen, N., Martinson, B. C., & ter Riet, G. (2016). Ranking of research misbehaviors: A survey among participants of four World Conferences on Research Integrity. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1, 17.
  • Wager, E., & Kleinert, S. (2012). Responsible research publication: international standards for authors. In Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment (pp. 309–316). World Scientific.
  • Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS ONE, 4(5), e5738.
  • Resnik, D. B. (2015). What is ethics in research & why is it important? National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. (Background resource on research ethics principles.)

If you want, I can now: (a) search Campbellsville University’s library for a recent peer-reviewed article on integrity if you provide me with access or allow me to guide you through the search; or (b) convert this model into a final submission once you paste the actual article citation and key findings from your chosen article. Which would you prefer?

Related Assignments