Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/171075
Authors: 
Hoover, Gary A.
Hopp, Christian
Year of Publication: 
2017
Series/Report no.: 
CESifo Working Paper 6611
Abstract: 
This research presents the results of a survey regarding scientific misconduct elicited from a sample of 1,215 management researchers. We find that misconduct (research that was either fabricated or falsified) is not encountered often by reviewers nor editors. Yet, there is a strong prevalence of misrepresentations (method inadequacy, omission or withholding of contradictory results, dropping of unsupported hypotheses). Despite these findings, respondents put a fair deal of trust in the replicability and robustness of findings being published. A sizeable majority of editors and authors eschew open data policies but sees value in replication studies to ensure credibility in empirical research.
Subjects: 
scientific misconduct
data fabrication
data misrepresentation
ethics
JEL: 
K30
A11
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.