Journal of Research and Publication Ethics (연구윤리)

Korea Distribution Science Association (한국유통과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

An Exploratory Study of Research Ethics Training and Ethical Validity

  • Hye-Yoon PARK (Department of Aviation Tourism, Hanseo University)
  • Received : 2024.08.22
  • Accepted : 2024.09.15
  • Published : 2024.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The effectiveness of research ethics education in enabling researchers to think and judge ethically in conducting research. It is a fundamental solution for the establishment of research ethics in the research field, not only for current researchers but also for the next generation. It measured various variables related to ethics that can lead to ethical behavior through a quasi-experimental design to support the reliability of the study. Research Design, data and methodology: Examine prior research on research ethics and explore current research ethics education and practice. It aims to study how to effectively implement and validate specific aspects of research ethics. To investigate, study, and validate research ethics education and research ethics systems. Results: It is defined as the effectiveness or value of training as measured by changes in knowledge and behavior in reaction, learning, behavior, and outcome evaluations measured after learning. Conclusions: For the effectiveness of research ethics education, various support measures need to be mobilized for the spread and establishment of research ethics education. Formalized and continuous research ethics education is needed. It is important that the knowledge acquired through long-term and consistent research ethics training is transferred to ethical behavior in the research field.

Keywords

References

  1. Bradley D. E., & Roberts J. A. (2004). Self-employment and job satisfaction: investigating the role of self-efficacy, depression, and seniority. Journal of Small Business Management, 42, 37-58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2004.00096.x
  2. Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2019). Ethics in business research. Oxford University Press.
  3. Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2001). Validation of a New General Self-Efficacy Scale. Organizational Research Methods, 4(1), 62-83. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810141004
  4. Dennis, S., Garrett, P., Yim, H., Hamm, J., Osth, A. F., Sreekumar, V., & Stone, B. (2019). Privacy versus open science. Behavior research methods, 51, 1839-1848. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01259-5
  5. Drolet, M., Rose-Derouin, E., Leblanc, J., Ruest, M., & Williams-Jones, B. (2022). Ethical issues in research: perceptions of researchers, research ethics board members and research ethics experts. Journal of Academic Ethics, 21(2), 269-292, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-022-09455-3
  6. Gibson, S., Benson, O., & Brand, S. L. (2013). Talking about suicide: Confidentiality and anonymity in qualitative research. Nursing ethics, 20(1), 18-29, https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733012452684
  7. Husband, G. (2020). Ethical Data Collection and Recognizing the Impact of Semi-Structured Interviews on Research Respondents. Education Sciences, 10(8), 206.
  8. Hwang, H. J., Kim, D. H., Youn, M. K., Lee, J. W., & Lee, J. H. (2014). The Standard of Judgment on Plagiarism in Research Ethics and the Guideline of Global Journals for KODISA. Journal of Distribution Science, 12(6), 15-20. https://doi.org/10.15722/JDS.12.6.201406.15
  9. Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., & Durham, C. C. (1997). The dispositional causes of job satisfaction: A core evaluations approach. Research in Organizational Behavior, 19, 151- 188.
  10. Kang, E., & Hwang, H. J. (2021). Ethical Conducts in Qualitative Research Methodology: Participant Observation and Interview Process. Journal of Research and Publication Ethics, 2(2), 5-10. https://doi.org/10.15722/JRPE.2.2.202109.5
  11. Kang, E.G., & Hwang, H.J. (2023). The Importance of Anonymity and Confidentiality for Conducting Survey. Research. Journal of Research and Publication Ethics, 4(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.15722/JRPE.4.1.202303.1
  12. Luthans, F., Luthans, K. W., & Luthans, B. C. (2004). Positive psychological capital: beyond human and social capital. Business Horizons, 47(1), 45-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2003.11.007
  13. Novak, A. (2014). Anonymity, confidentiality, privacy, and identity: The ties that bind and break in communication research. Review of communication, 14(1), 36-48. https://doi.org/10.1080/15358593.2014.942351
  14. Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465. https://doi.org/10.2307/256865
  15. Steger, M. F., Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2012). Measuring Meaningful Work: The Work and Meaning Inventory (MWI). Journal of Career Assessment, 00, 1-16.
  16. Sutton, J., & Austin, Z. (2015). Qualitative research: Data collection, analysis, and management. The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy, 68(3), 226-231. https://doi.org/10.4212/cjhp.v68i3.1456
  17. Vainio, A. (2013). Beyond research ethics: Anonymity as 'ontology','analysis' and 'independence'. Qualitative Research, 13(6), 685-698. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112459669
  18. Youn, M. K. Lee, J. H. Kim, Y. E. Yang, H. C., Hwang, H. J., Kim, D. H., & Lee, J. W. (2015). KODISA Journals and Strategies. Journal of Distribution Science, 13(3), 5-9. https://doi.org/10.15722/JDS.13.3.201503.5