Crossing the Red Line? Empirical Evidence and Useful Recommendations on Questionable Research Practices among Business Scholars

H. Latan, C.J. Chiappetta Jabbour, Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour () and M. Ali
Additional contact information
Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour: Métis Lab EM Normandie - EM Normandie - École de Management de Normandie = EM Normandie Business School

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: Academic leaders in management from all over the world\textemdash including recent calls by the Academy of Management Shaw (Academy of Management Journal 60(3): 819\textendash 822, 2017)\textemdash have urged further research into the extent and use of questionable research practices~(QRPs). In order to provide empirical evidence on the topic of QRPs, this work presents two linked studies. Study 1 determines the level of use of QRPs based on self-admission rates and estimated prevalence among business scholars in Indonesia. It was determined that if the level of QRP use identified in Study 1 was quite high, Study 2 would be conducted to follow-up on this result, and this was indeed the case. Study 2 examines the factors that encourage and discourage the use of QRPs in the sample analyzed. The main research findings are as follows: (a) in Study 1, we found the self-admission rates and estimated prevalence of business scholars' involvement in QRPs to be quite high when compared with studies conducted in other countries and (b) in Study 2, we found pressure for publication from universities, fear of rejection of manuscripts, meeting the expectations of reviewers, and available rewards to be the main reasons for the use of QRPs in Indonesia, whereas (c) formal sanctions and prevention efforts are factors that discourage QRPs. Recommendations for stakeholders (in this case, reviewers, editors, funders, supervisors, chancellors and others) are also provided in order to reduce the use of QRPs. \textcopyright 2021, The Author(s).

Keywords: Estimated prevalence; Ethics in research; Formal sanctions; Justifications; Perceived behavioral control; Prevention efforts; Questionable research practices (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2023
Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://normandie-univ.hal.science/hal-04276024v1
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Published in Journal of Business Ethics, 2023, 184 (3), pp.549--569. ⟨10.1007/s10551-021-04961-7⟩

Downloads: (external link)
https://normandie-univ.hal.science/hal-04276024v1/document (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:hal:journl:hal-04276024

DOI: 10.1007/s10551-021-04961-7

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().