The purpose of this study was to identify personality, contextual, and knowledge variables among researchers that influenced the utilization of such reasoning strategies in professional decision-making. Reasoning strategies that facilitate critical analysis, information gathering, and evaluation of outcomes can offset errors and biases in thinking and facilitate sound decision-making ( DuBois et al. 2015 Moore and Loewenstein 2004 Thiel, Connelly, and Griffith 2011). In so doing, investigators must manage self-serving biases, detrimental negative emotions, and short-term thinking, all of which hinder effective decision-making ( Bazerman, Tenbrunsel, and Wade-Benzoni 1998 DuBois et al. Professional decision-making requires identifying and thinking through the dynamics of uncertain situations, recognizing and weighing options, predicting likely outcomes, and often obtaining additional information ( Antes et al. Researchers’ actions influence their ability to exemplify the ethical principles of science and of their professions, and, ultimately, the integrity of their contributions to science ( DuBois et al. Sound professional decisions adhere to the norms and ethical expectations of research, safeguard the trust of the public, promote collaboration, and foster the generation of new scientific knowledge ( DuBois et al. In order to navigate these issues successfully, investigators must recognize the ethical considerations present in such situations, interpret written and unwritten rules, and address social and political dynamics, among other considerations ( Devereaux 2014 Shamoo and Resnik 2015). 2007 De Vries, Anderson, and Martinson 2006 Steneck 2007).
Researchers must make a number of decisions in the course of a project, including considerations about data, protecting research participants, mentoring junior investigators, managing personnel, and handling conflicts of interest ( AAMC-AAU 2008 Anderson et al. The implications of these findings for understanding the measurement of decision-making in research and future directions for research and RCR education are discussed.
In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, lower moral disengagement scores, higher RCR knowledge, and identifying the United States as one’s nation of origin emerged as key predictors of stronger performance on the PDR. PDR scores were not related to socially desirable responding, or to measures of work stressors and the remaining impulsivity subscales. Negative associations were found for the PDR and measures of cynicism, moral disengagement, and compliance disengagement, while positive associations were found for the PDR and RCR knowledge and positive urgency, an impulsivity subscale. The professional decision-making in research (PDR) measure was administered to 400 NIH-funded and industry-funded investigators, along with measures of cynicism, moral disengagement, compliance disengagement, impulsivity, work stressors, knowledge of responsible conduct of research (RCR), and socially desirable response tendencies.
0 kommentar(er)
