Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance

Papers
(The TQCC of Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance is 6. The table below lists those papers that are above that threshold based on CrossRef citation counts [max. 250 papers]. The publications cover those that have been published in the past four years, i.e., from 2022-01-01 to 2026-01-01.)
ArticleCitations
Mitigating global climate change and its environmental impact is a key social responsibility of scientists and should be part of research ethics policies and guidelines173
Misinterpretation of statistical nonsignificance as a sign of potential bias: Hydroxychloroquine as a case study95
Addressing serious and continuing research noncompliance and integrity violations through action plans: Interviews with institutional officials42
Taking it back: A pilot study of a rubric measuring retraction notice quality42
Ethical committee frameworks and processes used to evaluate humanities research require reform: Findings from a UK-wide network consultation38
The case for affiliation contribution statements30
Inclusive, engaged, and accountable institutional review boards30
Exploring scientific misconduct in Morocco based on an analysis of plagiarism perception in a cohort of 1,220 researchers and students28
On the epistemological and methodological implications of AI co-authorship28
Challenges for enforcing editorial policies on AI-generated papers27
Fake no more: The redemption of ChatGPT in literature reviews23
Correction23
How (not) to be held accountable in research: A reply to my critics21
Characteristics of blacklisted journals: Evidence from Chinese-language academic journals19
A comprehensive ethics and data governance framework for data-intensive health research: Lessons from an Italian cancer research institute18
Procrastination and inconsistency: Expressions of concern for publications with compromised integrity17
Manifestations of research ethics and integrity leadership in national surveys – cases of Estonia, Finland, Norway, France and the Netherlands17
Comparing the performance of Retraction Watch Database, PubMed, and Web of Science in identifying retracted publications in medicine16
Inverted U-Shaped relationship between team size and citation impact: Mediating role of responsibility diffusion16
Does YouTube promote research ethics and conduct? A content analysis of Youtube Videos and analysis of sentiments through viewers comments14
Perceptions of network-level ethics in an engineering research center: Analysis of ethical issues & practices reported by scientific & engineering participants14
Status bias in Chinese scholarly publishing: an exploratory study based on mixed methods14
Analysis of scientific paper retractions due to data problems: Revealing challenges and countermeasures in data management14
Comparing companion open access journals to their traditional journal counterparts13
Institutional policies on plagiarism management:A comparison of universities in mainland China and Hong Kong13
Opening Pandora’s box: Developing reviewer rhetorical sensitivity through retracted articles13
The author expression ​of concern (AEOC): A proposed formal mechanism to allow authors’ legitimate concerns to be heard, and their rights and voices to be respected12
Typology of conflict of commitment (COC) in the era of inappropriate foreign influence in research12
A comprehensive overview of studies that assessed article retractions within the biomedical sciences12
Creating research ethics and integrity country report cards: Case study from Europe12
In defense of the ICMJE authorship guideline, a rejoinder to Curzer12
How to write a good embedded ethics letter12
How to embed ethics into laboratory research11
AI-based research mentors: Plausible scenarios and ethical issues11
Rethinking the author name ambiguity problem and beyond: The case of the Chinese context10
Clarifying polarization in research10
A structural equation model for cyber academic dishonesty in higher education: Evidence from Taiwan10
GAIDeT (Generative AI Delegation Taxonomy): A taxonomy for humans to delegate tasks to generative artificial intelligence in scientific research and publishing10
Leadership, management, and team practices in research labs: Development and validation of two new measures10
Industry effects on evidence: a case study of long-acting injectable antipsychotics9
Fabrication in a study about honesty: A lost episode of columbo illustrating how forensic statistics is performed8
On polarization, incommensurability, and value-laden research. A response to Bjørn Hofmann, 20248
How do researchers perceive research misbehaviors? A case study of Indian researchers8
Teaching research integrity as discussed in research integrity codes: A systematic literature review8
COI works both ways: Investigation of misconduct by an independent research integrity organization is the way to go8
Toward an “ecosystems” approach to responsible conduct of research (RCR): A multi-stakeholder framework for collaborative accountability and policy recommendations on research integrity8
Scientific priorities and relational dynamics during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study8
‘I don’t believe in the neutrality of research. OK?’ Mapping researchers’ attitudes toward values in science8
Retraction (mal)practices of elite marketing and social psychology journals in the Dirk Smeesters’ research misconduct case8
Superb supervision: A pilot study on training supervisors to convey responsible research practices onto their PhD candidates8
The consistency of peer-reviewers and the process of commensuration: a comment on Bolek et al. (2022)8
Publishing in potentially predatory journals: Do universities adopt university leaders’ dishonest behavior?7
‘Special issue-ization’ as a growth and revenue strategy: Reproduction by the “big five” and the risks for research integrity7
Evolution and characterization of health sciences paper retractions in Brazil and Portugal7
Mapping nine decades of research integrity studies (1935–2024): A scientometric analysis7
Keeping the health of our home planet in mind as we do research7
Disclosing artificial intelligence use in scientific research and publication: When should disclosure be mandatory, optional, or unnecessary?7
Are the lists of questionable journals reasonable: A case study of early warning journal lists7
Reflections on the 2024 Final Rule on Public Health Service Policies on Research Misconduct6
Timing and monitoring of financial disclosures in publications: A cross-institutional assessment of financial conflict of interest reports6
Using AI to write scholarly publications6
The research literature is an unsafe workplace6
The case for compensating peer reviewers: A response to Moher and Vieira Armond6
Spin in randomized controlled trials of pharmacology in COVID-19: A systematic review6
Limits of ethical non-human subjects research in an applied setting6
AI, reviewer incentives, and questions raised by García et al. 6
Incorporating replication in higher education: Supervisors’ perspectives and institutional pressures6
Time-based changes in authorship trend in research-intensive universities in Malaysia6
“Dear Editor, may I speak with you?“6
0.092371940612793