Assessing the climate for research ethics in labs: Development and validation of a brief measure.

Erin D Solomon, Tammy English, Matthew Wroblewski, James M DuBois, Alison L Antes
Author Information
  1. Erin D Solomon: Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA. ORCID
  2. Tammy English: Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
  3. Matthew Wroblewski: Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
  4. James M DuBois: Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
  5. Alison L Antes: Bioethics Research Center, Division of General Medical Sciences, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.

Abstract

The environment researchers work in influences their ethical decisions and behavior. A "climate" for research ethics in a research lab exists when members of the lab perceive that the group values and is committed to principles of research ethics. In this study, we aimed to develop a short, reliable and valid measure assessing perceptions of climate for research ethics at the lab level. The resulting measure, Lab Climate for Research Ethics, was developed using standard scale development guidelines. In a large sample of postdoctoral researchers ( = 570), we found preliminary evidence that the new measure has adequate internal consistency reliability. It was also correlated with an existing measure of climate for research ethics and was not correlated with social desirability, demonstrating evidence of construct validity. The new measure can be used in a variety of contexts, including research administrators seeking information about climate within labs across an institution and researchers who study lab environments.

Keywords

References

  1. Sci Eng Ethics. 2013 Sep;19(3):835-50 [PMID: 23096774]
  2. AJOB Empir Bioeth. 2017 Jul-Sep;8(3):211-219 [PMID: 28949895]
  3. Sci Eng Ethics. 2006 Jan;12(1):23-39 [PMID: 16501645]
  4. PLoS One. 2016 Mar 11;11(3):e0151571 [PMID: 26967736]
  5. Sci Eng Ethics. 2019 Feb;25(1):231-245 [PMID: 29071571]
  6. Sci Eng Ethics. 2006 Jan;12(1):53-74 [PMID: 16501647]
  7. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2014 Dec;9(5):72-88 [PMID: 25747692]
  8. Life Sci Soc Policy. 2019 Jun 10;15(1):5 [PMID: 31179512]
  9. Psychol Bull. 1955 Jul;52(4):281-302 [PMID: 13245896]
  10. Sci Eng Ethics. 2019 Aug;25(4):1085-1093 [PMID: 29594670]
  11. J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2007 Dec;2(4):35-52 [PMID: 19385806]
  12. Sci Eng Ethics. 2001 Jul;7(4):525-37; discussion 538-40 [PMID: 11697009]
  13. Sci Eng Ethics. 2018 Apr;24(2):699-725 [PMID: 28608033]
  14. Sci Eng Ethics. 2019 Oct;25(5):1499-1530 [PMID: 30604356]
  15. J Microbiol Biol Educ. 2014 Dec 15;15(2):108-16 [PMID: 25574258]
  16. Acad Med. 2007 Sep;82(9):853-60 [PMID: 17726390]
  17. Nature. 2019 Jun;570(7759):5 [PMID: 31160744]
  18. Acad Med. 2018 Apr;93(4):550-555 [PMID: 29068823]
  19. Sci Eng Ethics. 2013 Sep;19(3):813-34 [PMID: 23096775]
  20. J Consult Psychol. 1960 Aug;24:349-54 [PMID: 13813058]
  21. PLoS One. 2015 Jul 20;10(7):e0133662 [PMID: 26192805]
  22. PLoS One. 2019 Apr 24;14(4):e0214595 [PMID: 31017929]
  23. Account Res. 2016;23(5):288-308 [PMID: 27093003]
  24. Psychol Bull. 1959 Mar;56(2):81-105 [PMID: 13634291]
  25. Sci Eng Ethics. 2016 Apr;22(2):391-416 [PMID: 26071940]
  26. Sci Eng Ethics. 2018 Oct;24(5):1421-1436 [PMID: 28913604]
  27. Sci Eng Ethics. 2020 Dec;26(6):2893-2910 [PMID: 32592136]
  28. Sci Eng Ethics. 2018 Aug;24(4):1023-1034 [PMID: 29855866]
  29. PLoS One. 2019 Jan 18;14(1):e0210599 [PMID: 30657778]
  30. Account Res. 2019 Apr;26(3):198-226 [PMID: 31033345]
  31. Sci Eng Ethics. 2002 Apr;8(2):191-205 [PMID: 12092490]

Grants

  1. K01 HG008990/NHGRI NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Ethics, Research
Humans
Psychometrics
Reproducibility of Results
Research Personnel
Surveys and Questionnaires

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0researchethicsmeasureclimatelabresearchersenvironmentstudyResearchevidencenewcorrelatedworkinfluencesethicaldecisionsbehavior"climate"existsmembersperceivegroupvaluescommittedprinciplesaimeddevelopshortreliablevalidassessingperceptionslevelresultingLabClimateEthicsdevelopedusingstandardscaledevelopmentguidelineslargesamplepostdoctoral= 570foundpreliminaryadequateinternalconsistencyreliabilityalsoexistingsocialdesirabilitydemonstratingconstructvaliditycanusedvarietycontextsincludingadministratorsseekinginformationwithinlabsacrossinstitutionenvironmentsAssessinglabs:Developmentvalidationbriefintegritymeasurement

Similar Articles

Cited By (3)