Responsible Conduct of Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders: Faculty and Student Perceptions PurposeTwo Web-based surveys (Surveys I and II) were used to assess perceptions of faculty and students in Communication Sciences and Disorders (CSD) regarding the responsible conduct of research (RCR).MethodSurvey questions addressed 9 RCR domains thought important to the responsible conduct of research: (a) human subjects protections; (b) research involving animals; ... Research Integrity Supplement
Research Integrity Supplement  |   February 2011
Responsible Conduct of Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders: Faculty and Student Perceptions
 
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Fred D. Minifie
    University of Washington, Seattle
  • Randall R. Robey
    University of Virginia, Charlottesville
  • Jennifer Horner
    Ohio University, Athens
  • Janis C. Ingham
    University of California, Santa Barbara
  • Charissa Lansing
    University of Illinois at Urbana—Champaign
  • James H. McCartney
    California State University, Sacramento
  • Elham-Eid Alldredge
    REDA International, Inc., Wheaton, MD
  • Sarah C. Slater
    American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Rockville, MD
  • Sharon E. Moss
    American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, Rockville, MD
  • Contact author: Jennifer Horner, College of Health Sciences and Professions, Ohio University, W380 Grover Center, Athens, OH 45701. E-mail: hornerj@ohio.edu.
  • Sharon E. Moss is now at the Office of Research Oversight, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC.
    Sharon E. Moss is now at the Office of Research Oversight, Department of Veterans Affairs, Washington, DC.×
  • © 2011 American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
Article Information
Professional Issues & Training
Research Integrity Supplement   |   February 2011
Responsible Conduct of Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders: Faculty and Student Perceptions
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, February 2011, Vol. 54, S363-S393. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0262)
History: Received December 4, 2009 , Accepted October 4, 2010
 
Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, February 2011, Vol. 54, S363-S393. doi:10.1044/1092-4388(2010/09-0262)
History: Received December 4, 2009; Accepted October 4, 2010
Web of Science® Times Cited: 4

PurposeTwo Web-based surveys (Surveys I and II) were used to assess perceptions of faculty and students in Communication Sciences and Disorders (CSD) regarding the responsible conduct of research (RCR).

MethodSurvey questions addressed 9 RCR domains thought important to the responsible conduct of research: (a) human subjects protections; (b) research involving animals; (c) publication practices and responsible authorship; (d) mentor/trainee responsibilities; (e) collaborative science; (f) peer review; (g) data acquisition, management, sharing, and ownership; (h) conflicts of interest; and (i) research misconduct. Respondents rated each of 37 topics for importance and for sufficiency of instructional coverage.

ResultsRespondents to Survey I were 137 faculty members from 68 (26%) of the 261 graduate programs in CSD. By comparison, 237 students from 39 (15%) programs responded to Survey II. Data about the importance and sufficiency of coverage of each of the 37 items were transformed into z scores to reveal relative ratings among the 37 topics. Data presentations were grouped for topics in each of the 9 RCR domains. Ratings indicated the relatively high importance assigned among the 37 topics by CSD faculty and students. Sufficiency of coverage of those same topics received lower ratings.

ConclusionsThe results of these surveys support the notion that students in CSD perceive that they are receiving information about RCR. The data pertaining to sufficiency of coverage provide a basis for improving instruction in this important aspect of research education.

Acknowledgment
This research was supported by a grant from the Office of Research Integrity and National Institute of Neurological Diseases and Stroke Grant NS44534. We are grateful to Dean Garstecki at Northwestern University for his contribution to the conceptualization of the surveys ultimately used by the Research Integrity Grant Group.
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access