Taiwanese and American Graduate Students' Misconceptions Regarding Responsible Conduct of Research: A Cross-National Comparison Using a Two-Tier Test Approach.

Individual researchers may interpret responsible conduct of research (RCR) in various ways, especially given the diversity of research personnel in modern science. Therefore, understanding individuals' RCR-related misconceptions is important, as it can help RCR instructors customize their lessons to target learners' incorrect and incomplete ideas. In this vein, this study aimed to explore whether Taiwanese and American graduate students differ in their perceptions and misconceptions regarding RCR-related concepts and, if so, to determine these differences. A diagnostic assessment, the Revised RCR Reasoning Test (rev-RCRRT), was developed to pursue the intended goal. The rev-RCRRT is a two-tier test capable of diagnosing whether a student's justifications of ethical acceptance in relation to specific RCR-related concepts are based on incorrect or incomplete ideas of RCR. The current results indicated that, first, participating graduate students' test performances dropped drastically between the first- and second-tier items, suggesting that they were able to judge the ethical acceptability of given RCR-specific scenarios but lacked the advanced knowledge required to explain their judgments. Second, in general, American students achieved significantly better scores on the rev-RCRRT than Taiwanese students. Third, the two groups held different RCR-related misconceptions centered around various RCR topics. Specifically, Taiwanese students' misconceptions involved concepts related to authorship, piecemeal publication, and human-subject protection. However, American students sometimes misjudged the issues regarding duplicate submissions and publication and the reproducibility of research and replication of ideas. In summary, through a cross-national comparative method, this study not only suggests that graduate students from different national backgrounds interpret RCR differently but also provides substantial evidence for the employment of a two-tier test approach in RCR-specific contexts. The implications of the current findings for future research and the utility of using two-tier tests in RCR instruction are also discussed in this article.

Taiwanese Researchers' Perceptions of Questionable Authorship Practices: An Exploratory Study.

In 2014, SAGE Publications retracted 60 articles authored by Taiwanese researchers due to suspected peer-review fraud. This scandal led to the resignation of the Minister of Education at the time since he coauthored several retracted works. Issues regarding the lack of transparent decision-making processes regarding authorship were further disclosed. Motivated by the scandal, we believe that this is one of the first empirical studies of questionable authorship practices (QAPs) in East Asian academia; we investigate Taiwanese researchers' perceptions of QAPs. To meet this purpose, a self-reported survey was developed. Four hundred and three local researchers, including research faculty (e.g., professors), postdoctoral researchers, and Ph.D. students, participated in the survey. Four major findings resulted. First, the underlying causes of Taiwanese doctoral students' engagement in QAPs were attributable to their desire to achieve particular academic-related successes and their feeling of reciprocal obligation to support other researchers. Second, the underlying motives for Taiwanese research associates' (i.e., research faculty and postdoctoral fellows) engagement in QAPs were attributable to their attempts to achieve particular career successes and of the desire to consolidate their professional networks. Third, the participants generally agreed that QAPs had a long history among local academics but were rarely reported. Fourth, participants' backgrounds (i.e., research discipline, academic rank, and type of affiliations) had significant effects on their responses regarding particular authorship issues; however, their gender did not have a significant effect. QAPs are a critical issue in Taiwanese academia; therefore, we discussed the implications of the current findings including subsequent instruction and future research.

Assessment criteria for research misconduct: Taiwanese researchers' perceptions.

Assessing the severity of an instance of research misconduct is undoubtedly challenging, especially when the result of the assessment may be key to suggesting subsequent sanctions. However, only a few references are currently available in the Taiwanese academic context. In a previous study, the present authors developed The Assessment Criteria for Research Misconduct (The Criteria) based on existing international policies and guidelines and reviewed by local research scholars for content validity. The Criteria, with a total of 28 items, were organized into three sections: general criteria for determining case severity, aggravating criteria, and mitigating criteria. In the current study, the authors further conducted a survey and collected data on 277 Taiwanese researchers' perceived importance of each criterion included in The Criteria. The results showed that participants generally agreed with the importance of all criteria. However, the group that lacked case-handling experience attributed significantly greater levels of importance to the criterion of original will (proactive, passive, or coercive) toward participation in misconduct than did the experienced group. In addition, the participants exhibited greater variation in the perceived importance of the mitigating criteria. Finally, the possible utility of The Criteria in real contexts and training materials is suggested in the study.

Differences in gynecologic tumor development in Amhr2-Cre mice with KRASG12D or KRASG12V mutations.

How different KRAS variants impact tumor initiation and progression in vivo has not been thoroughly examined. We hypothesize that the ability of either KRASG12D or KRASG12V mutations to initiate tumor formation is context dependent. Amhr2-Cre mice express Cre recombinase in tissues that develop into the fallopian tubes, uterus, and ovaries. We used these mice to conditionally express either the KRASG12V/+ or KRASG12D/+ mutation. Mice with the genotype Amhr2-Cre Pten(fl/fl) KrasG12D/+(G12D mice) had abnormal follicle structures and developed low-grade serous ovarian carcinomas with 100% penetrance within 18 weeks. In contrast, mice with the genotype Amhr2-Cre Pten(fl/fl) KrasG12V/+ (G12V mice) had normal follicle structures, and about 90% of them developed uterine tumors with diverse histological features resembling those of leiomyoma and leiomyosarcoma. Granulosa cell tumors also developed in G12V mice. Differences in cell-signaling pathways in the uterine tissues of G12D and G12V mice were identified using RNA sequencing and reverse-phase protein array analyses. We found that CTNNB1, IL1A, IL1B, TNF, TGFB1, APP, and IL6 had the higher activity in G12V mice than in G12D mice. These mouse models will be useful for studying the differences in signaling pathways driven by KrasG12V/+ or KrasG12D/+ mutations to aid development of targeted therapies for specific KRAS mutant variants. Our leiomyoma model driven by the KrasG12V/+ mutation will also be useful in deciphering the malignant progression from leiomyoma to leiomyosarcoma.