Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This study examines how working scientists themselves understand, conceptualize, apply, and communicate norms and standards for good research practice. Drawing on semi-structured, detailed narrative interviews with more than 80 scientists, we highlight various topics of concern, including tensions between methodological requirements for good research practice and individual career goals, uncertainty about how exactly certain acknowledged methodological imperatives—such as replication—should be interpreted and turned into practice and the delegation of the responsibilty for ensuring good practice.
Hangel et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: