Roles for scientific societies in promoting integrity in publication ethics

Scientific societies can have a powerful influence on the professional lives of scientists. Using this influence, they have a responsibility to make long-term commitments and investments in promoting integrity in publication, just as in other areas of research ethics. Concepts that can inform the thinking and activities of scientific societies with regard to publication ethics are: the “hidden curriculum” (the message of actions rather than formal statements), a fresh look at the components of acting with integrity, deviancy as a normally occurring phenomenon in human society, and the scientific community as an actual community. A society’s first step is to decide what values it will promote, within the framework of present-day standards of good conduct of science and given the society’s history and traditions. The society then must create educational programs that serve members across their careers. Scientific societies must take seriously the implications of the problem; set policies and standards for publication ethics for their members; educate about and enforce the standards; bring the issues before the members early and often; and maintain continuing dialogue with editors. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the AAAS-Office of Research Integrity (ORI) meeting in Washington DC on the theme: “The Role and Activities of Scientific Societies in Promoting Research Integrity” held on April 10–11, 2000.     

Brief report: Publications from mainland China,Hong Kong,and Taiwan in behavioral journals 1980–2021

Research involving international research communities has been advocated in the field of behavior analysis (Dymond et al., 2000; Martin et al., 2016). The purpose of the present study was to report the status of behavioral research in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, in terms of number of publications, types of research, and frequency of collaboration with international researchers. Fifteen behavioral journals were selected from the list by Cooper et al. (2020). These were searched by hand to find publications conducted in or authored by researchers from mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan dating from each journal's inception to December 2021. The earliest publication we found appeared in 1980 in The Psychological Record. Over the following four decades (1980–1989; 1990–1999; 2000–2009; 2010–2021), the number of publications per decade increased dramatically and continues in recent years to rise. Publications include research reports, review papers, and conceptual articles, with the majority being basic research reports published in Behavioral Processes. Approximately half the publications involve collaboration with international researchers, mostly in North America. Implications for behavioral research, practice, and policy in mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan are discussed.     

Improving the Reporting of Health and Psychological Research

A growing body of empirical evidence has consistently demonstrated that much publically and privately funded research is reported in a way that makes it difficult for the findings to be included in evidence syntheses or used by researchers, clinicians, policy makers, and the public. Poorly reported studies thus represent a significant waste of scarce resources. Reporting guidelines are one strategy that has been increasingly used as a method to improve the completeness or usability of primary and secondary research across a broad range of disciplines including psychology. We present a synopsis of two studies investigating the impact of the Transparent Reporting of Evaluation with Nonrandomised Designs statement and factors that affect authors' and journal editors' use of it and other reporting guidelines. We also make recommendations for future guideline development or revisions based on our experiences, provide details of resources for psychologists, and make suggestions for future research and recommendations for improving the transparency of reporting of psychological research.     

Counselor Education Doctoral Program Faculty Members’ Refereed Article Publications

This study investigated articles published in refereed journals by counselor educators (N = 378) employed by 55 doctoral programs accredited by the Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs. The counselor educators published in 321 different journals, and the variables that predicted publications rates included (a) year earned doctoral degree, (b) academic rank, (c) Carnegie category classification of current university, and (d) gender. Implications for counselor education and scholarly productivity are discussed.     

SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR REVIEWING BOOKS

Abstract: The quality of peer‐reviewed journals is vulnerable to the absence of declared standards for book reviews. Reviewers should agree to several simple rules before undertaking to review books and while writing them. Sensitivity to an author's aims is one requirement; familiarity with an author's previous and relevant publications is another. Critical judgment is always appropriate, but it can be set apart from an account of the ideas reviewed.