Scholars’ preferred solutions for research misconduct: results from a survey of faculty members at America’s top 100 research universities

Research misconduct is harmful because it threatens public health and public safety, and also undermines public confidence in science. Efforts to eradicate ongoing and prevent future misconduct are numerous and varied, yet the question of “what works” remains largely unanswered. To shed light on this issue, this study used data from both mail and online surveys administered to a stratified random sample of tenured and tenure-track faculty members (N = 613) in the social, natural, and applied sciences at America’s top 100 research universities. Participants were asked to gauge the effectiveness of various intervention strategies: formal sanctions (professional and legal), informal sanctions (peers), prevention efforts (ethics and professional training), and reducing the pressures associated with working in research-intensive units. Results indicated that (1) formal sanctions received the highest level of support, (2) female scholars and researchers working in the applied sciences favored formal sanctions, and (3) a nontrivial portion of the sample supported an integrated approach that combined elements of different strategies. A key takeaway for university administrators is that a multifaceted approach to dealing with the problem of research misconduct, which prominently features enhanced formal sanctions, will be met with the support of university faculty.     

Christian Pastors’ Perspectives and Insights on the Practice of Family Therapists Referring LGB Clients: Exploring the Role of Religion

Abstract

This qualitative study explored Christian pastors’ perceptions and insights for family therapists who refuse to work with lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) clients by consistently referring them. Twenty-one pastors from diverse Christian traditions were interviewed. Thematic analysis identified the following themes related to the pastors’ perceptions of the practice of referring LGB clients: (1) Best Interest of the Client and Therapist, (2) Discriminatory Practice, and (3) No Referrals will be Provided. The following themes represent pastors’ advice for family therapists: (1) Develop a Well-Thought-Out Referral Plan; (2) Be Accountable for Your Own Beliefs; and (3) Engage in Conversations.     

Using a Technological Augmentation to Enhance Parent-Infant Interactions With Parents at Risk

ABSTRACT

Effective parent training programs may need to be tailored for at-risk parents by using simple language, presenting concrete concepts, and simple technologies. We present four single-case research-design studies examining if the use of digital frames enhances parent-infant interactions with a diverse range of mothers with varied levels of risk for maltreatment. Based on self-modeling, the frames contain photographs of mother-infant dyads in posed interactions representing desired criterion behaviors from the parent-infant interaction (PII) module of SafeCare®. Results indicate that the use of inexpensive digital frames appears to enhance already good outcomes of the SafeCare PII module.     

Reliability and Validity of the Dyadic Observed Communication Scale (DOCS)

We evaluated the reliability and validity of the Dyadic Observed Communication Scale (DOCS) coding scheme, which was developed to capture a range of communication components between parents and adolescents. Adolescents and their caregivers were recruited from mental health facilities for participation in a large, multi-site family-based HIV prevention intervention study. Seventy-one dyads were randomly selected from the larger study sample and coded using the DOCS at baseline. Preliminary validity and reliability of the DOCS was examined using various methods, such as comparing results to self-report measures and examining interrater reliability. Results suggest that the DOCS is a reliable and valid measure of observed communication among parent-adolescent dyads that captures both verbal and nonverbal communication behaviors that are typical intervention targets. The DOCS is a viable coding scheme for use by researchers and clinicians examining parent-adolescent communication. Coders can be trained to reliably capture individual and dyadic components of communication for parents and adolescents and this complex information can be obtained relatively quickly.     

The paradoxical moderating effect of body image investment on the impact of weight-based derogatory media

Weight-based derogatory media consist of derogation of celebrities for failing to meet the thin ideal. This study examined the impact of weight-based derogatory media on women's body satisfaction, appearance self-esteem, fear of negative appearance evaluation, and negative affect. Female undergraduates (N = 240) were exposed to either tabloid-style pictures and articles derogating average size celebrities for gaining weight, or to the same images accompanied by neutral information. Women in the derogation condition reported greater fear of negative appearance evaluation than did women in the neutral media condition. Contrary to predictions, women low in maladaptive body image investment reported lower body satisfaction and appearance self-esteem in the derogatory media condition than they did in the neutral condition, while women high in maladaptive investment did not differ across conditions. Highly invested women's unexpected reaction may be understood as a defence against a threat to a valued domain of the self.     

Meta‐Analysis of Integrated Primary and Behavioral Health Care Interventions for Treating Substance Use Among Adults

This meta‐analysis detected low effects in reducing substance use (Hedges's g = –0.11) in favor of using integrated primary and behavioral health care (IPBH) compared with treatment‐as‐usual approaches for adult patients with substance use. The impact of IPBH was limited.     

Estimating Incremental Validity Under Missing Data

A common form of missing data is caused by selection on an observed variable (e.g., Z). If the selection variable was measured and is available, the data are regarded as missing at random (MAR). Selection biases correlation, reliability, and effect size estimates when these estimates are computed on listwise deleted (LD) data sets. On the other hand, maximum likelihood (ML) estimates are generally unbiased and outperform LD in most situations, at least when the data are MAR. The exception is when we estimate the partial correlation. In this situation, LD estimates are unbiased when the cause of missingness is partialled out. In other words, there is no advantage of ML estimates over LD estimates in this situation. We demonstrate that under a MAR condition, even ML estimates may become biased, depending on how partial correlations are computed. Finally, we conclude with recommendations about how future researchers might estimate partial correlations even when the cause of missingness is unknown and, perhaps, unknowable.     

Revisiting absolute and relative judgments in the WITNESS model

The WITNESS model (Clark in Applied Cognitive Psychology 17:629–654, 2003) provides a theoretical framework with which to investigate the factors that contribute to eyewitness identification decisions. One key factor involves the contributions of absolute versus relative judgments. An absolute contribution is determined by the degree of match between an individual lineup member and memory for the perpetrator; a relative contribution involves the degree to which the best-matching lineup member is a better match to memory than the remaining lineup members. In WITNESS, the proportional contributions of relative versus absolute judgments are governed by the values of the decision weight parameters. We conducted an exploration of the WITNESS model’s parameter space to determine the identifiability of these relative/absolute decision weight parameters, and compared the results to a restricted version of the model that does not vary the decision weight parameters. This exploration revealed that the decision weights in WITNESS are difficult to identify: Data often can be fit equally well by setting the decision weights to nearly any value and compensating with a criterion adjustment. Clark, Erickson, and Breneman (Law and Human Behavior 35:364–380, 2011) claimed to demonstrate a theoretical basis for the superiority of lineup decisions that are based on absolute contributions, but the relationship between the decision weights and the criterion weakens this claim. These findings necessitate reconsidering the role of the relative/absolute judgment distinction in eyewitness decision making.