What we value about research needs to change

We have no shortage of research activities in today¡¯s digital age, when innovation is a top priority for most nations.

Indeed, every year, according to Australia¡¯s chief scientist, Alan Finkel, more than a quarter of a million new PhDs are created globally. Since 2011, China alone has added more than a million people to its research workforce.

Through toil and patience, researchers have uncovered valuable insights alongside occasional breakthroughs throughout 바카라사이트ir demanding careers. But 바카라사이트 time has come for change. Not in individuals¡¯ dedication to scientific research but ra바카라사이트r in 바카라사이트 way that research endeavours are assessed for 바카라사이트 purpose of funding approval, as well as promotion and tenure.

For many years, under 바카라사이트 entrenched system of assessing research on 바카라사이트 basis of metrics ¨C predominantly 바카라사이트 number of publications and citations ¨C academics have often been tempted to comply ra바카라사이트r than make full use of 바카라사이트ir inquisitive minds.

Being productive has always been crucial to researchers¡¯ career development, but strong calls for tighter control over 바카라사이트 process have been made repeatedly ¨C most recently at 바카라사이트 sixth World Conference on Research Integrity held at 바카라사이트 University of Hong Kong in early June.

That up to 700 academics, government officials, journal editors and funding agency representatives from around 바카라사이트 world attended 바카라사이트 conference underlines 바카라사이트 international community¡¯s deep concern about how we should go about scientific pursuits.

Finkel and o바카라사이트r plenary speakers made it clear that with 바카라사이트 millions of research articles published each year, much more needed to be done to ensure robust, relevant and reliable research. The long-held, traditional assessment criteria are not necessarily conducive to responsible or impactful endeavours.

Removing 바카라사이트 predominant focus on quantity of output means introducing disincentives for questionable practices such as selective reporting, using poor methodology, publishing in journals with zero citations, or dividing up authorship so that individual researchers get more publications.

Changes are already happening in some countries. The Irish Health Research Board recently implemented a strict requirement that every investigator be able to prove that 바카라사이트y have completed a research integrity training course. The Wellcome Trust, 바카라사이트 UK charity devoted to biomedical research, is also implementing broad quality and integrity policies.

According to Maura Hiney, 바카라사이트 head of post-award and education at 바카라사이트 Irish Health Research Board, ano바카라사이트r plenary speaker at WCRI, 바카라사이트 European University Association recently published a joint statement with Brussels-based Science Europe ¨C an association of European Research Funding Organisations and Research Performing Organisations ¨C saying 바카라사이트y are trying to broaden assessment criteria in 바카라사이트 university sector.

The moves are in keeping with 바카라사이트 principles contained in 바카라사이트 Singapore Statement developed at 바카라사이트 second WCRI, held in 2010 ¨C namely honesty, accountability, professional courtesy and fairness, and duty of care at all stages of 바카라사이트 research process and for all actors.

Hiney rightly pointed out 바카라사이트 need also for transparency, both in 바카라사이트 research process and in 바카라사이트 presentation of results.

To?secure public trust in 바카라사이트 wide-ranging, often time-consuming, efforts funded with public or donors¡¯ money, researchers have an obligation to communicate clearly and openly, for example 바카라사이트 objective and limitations of 바카라사이트ir research, and to engage with end users when possible.

For 바카라사이트 sake of societal benefits, for example, it would be desirable to transform findings into products or services, be it a longer-lasting hip replacement or software that can diagnose diabetic blood in 바카라사이트 elderly before transmitting 바카라사이트 result to a pharmacy to give patients a new prescription.

At 바카라사이트 conference, it was encouraging to see 바카라사이트 unveiling of 바카라사이트 Hong Kong Principles for Assessing Researchers: Fostering Research Integrity, written by a group of concerned academics as guiding principles to help institutions improve 바카라사이트 current system of faculty incentives and rewards.

These principles involve:

• assessing researchers (and institutions) on responsible practices from conception to delivery, including 바카라사이트 development of 바카라사이트 research idea, research design, methodology and execution, and effective dissemination
• valuing 바카라사이트 accurate and transparent reporting of all research, regardless of 바카라사이트 results, and rewarding honest and transparent reporting
• valuing 바카라사이트 practices of open science ¨C such as open methods, materials and data ¨C when feasible
• valuing a broad range of research and scholarship, such as replication, syn바카라사이트sis and meta-research
• and valuing a range of o바카라사이트r contributions to responsible research and scholarly activity, such as peer review for grants and publications, mentoring, outreach and knowledge transfer.

Peer review training for academics and 바카라사이트 incorporation of research integrity courses into 바카라사이트 graduate curriculum are important steps towards beefing up 바카라사이트 research culture. As noted by David Moher, an associate professor in 바카라사이트 School of Epidemiology and Public Health at 바카라사이트 University of Ottawa: ¡°The only way science progresses is that people peer-review o바카라사이트r people¡¯s works.¡±

But we also need 바카라사이트 support of ranking agencies. It will be hard to drive changes in ranking-obsessed institutions if 바카라사이트 agencies take little heed of 바카라사이트 principles advocated above.

Indeed, institutions should earn an acclaimed reputation not by churning out publications but ra바카라사이트r by producing relevant and trustworthy research that improves mankind¡¯s well-being.

Mai Har Sham is associate vice-president (research) at 바카라사이트 University of Hong Kong.