The ‘shades of grey’ in research integrity—Researchers admit to questionable research practices that they do not perceive to be serious

Marta Entradas, Yan Feng and Inês Carneiro e Sousa

PLOS ONE, 2026, vol. 21, issue 1, 1-15

Abstract: Research misconduct practices like fabrication, falsification and plagiarism (FFP) are serious deviations from good research conduct, which have attracted attention in the literature due to the damage they can bring to science and society. However, less is known about the grey zone of researchers’ behaviours that deviate from responsible research conduct but do not fall under serious research misconduct practices. These are known as questionable research practices (QRPs), and they are believed to pose a no less serious threat to research integrity and science. Despite increasing research on the topic, the extent of the problem in different research fields and contexts is unknown. Using a sample of researchers working in Portuguese universities in six main fields of research (n = 1573), we report on QRPs that researchers admit to and how serious they perceive them to be, and on predictors of engagement in QRPs. We find that QRPs are widespread across all fields of research and seniority levels. Yet, younger, more prolific researchers, and those dismissing the seriousness of QRPs admitted to more QRPs. This suggests that some groups are at higher risk of misconduct and that there is a need for studying the motivations behind more susceptible groups to engage in QRPs.

Date: 2026
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0339056 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 39056&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0339056

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0339056

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().