Learn Before
Define data fabrication as a violation of scholarly integrity and explain why a researcher has an ethical duty to avoid it even when their results contradict their hypotheses.
Question: Define data fabrication as a violation of scholarly integrity and explain why a researcher has an ethical duty to avoid it even when their results contradict their hypotheses.
Sample answer: Data fabrication is a violation of scholarly integrity that occurs when a researcher invents non-existent data. It must be avoided because the core scientific goal is to understand the world as it actually is. Consequently, researchers have a duty to report their findings honestly and accurately, meaning they must never fabricate data even if the actual results contradict their hypotheses or expectations.
Key points:
- Data fabrication is defined as inventing non-existent data.
- The primary goal of science is to understand the world as it actually is.
- Researchers have a duty to report findings honestly and accurately.
- Data must never be fabricated, even when results contradict hypotheses or expectations.
Rubric: Answers must define data fabrication as inventing non-existent data, state that the scientific goal is to understand the world as it actually is, and explain that researchers have a duty to report findings honestly and accurately, regardless of whether they contradict expectations.
0
1
Tags
KPU
Research Methods in Psychology - 4th American Edition @ KPU
Related
Value of Unexpected Results
Which of the following accurately describes data fabrication in scientific research?
A researcher whose actual study results contradict their hypothesis is justified in replacing those results with invented data that support the hypothesis, because the invented data represent a plausible scientific outcome.
In psychological research, the goal is to understand the world as it actually is. Match each research scenario with the specific analytical reason why it violates the duty to provide an accurate and honest record of empirical observations.
A psychology researcher is evaluating their professional obligations after a study yields findings that contradict their initial hypotheses. Arrange the following researcher considerations in order of their ethical importance, from the most fundamental scientific principle to the most unacceptable violation of research standards.
Imagine you are designing a new 'Research Integrity Protocol' for a psychology department to proactively minimize the risk of data fabrication. Which of the following system designs would be most effective at ensuring that all reported findings correspond to actual empirical observations?
A cognitive psychologist studying memory finds that their sample size is too small to achieve statistical power. Rather than continuing to recruit participants, the researcher creates 10 fake data entries for 'participants' who never actually took part in the study. This unethical practice of inventing non-existent data is called _____.
Because the scientific goal is to understand the world as it actually is, a researcher who invents non-existent data is committing a violation of scholarly integrity known as data _____.
Dr. Marcus conducts a study on social media use and loneliness. After collecting data from 40 participants, the results show no significant relationship — contradicting his hypothesis. Believing the true relationship probably exists but was obscured by his small sample, he adds 10 fictional participant entries before submission so that the analysis yields a significant correlation. Because Dr. Marcus genuinely believed the underlying pattern was real, his addition of fictional data does not constitute data fabrication.
A research methods instructor presents four researcher actions to students studying scholarly integrity. Match each action to the scholarly integrity category that best characterizes it.
A journal editor receives a manuscript in which the data look suspicious — the results are implausibly clean and the reported standard deviations are nearly identical across all conditions. The editor must evaluate the appropriate steps for investigating a potential case of data fabrication. Arrange the following actions in the order they should be carried out to uphold scholarly integrity.
Define data fabrication as a violation of scholarly integrity and explain why a researcher has an ethical duty to avoid it even when their results contradict their hypotheses.
Diagnose Dr. Miller's actions using the ethical principles of scholarly integrity. Explain what violation has occurred, why it is problematic for the goal of science, and what she should have done with the unexpected results instead.
A student researcher is preparing to write their final report, but they realize that their survey results completely contradict their initial hypothesis. To fix this, they consider generating a few fictional survey responses that support their expectations. In one to three sentences, apply the principle of scholarly integrity to explain why the student must not do this.