Investigating the Reliability and Factor Structure of Kalichman’s “Survey 2: Research Misconduct” Questionnaire: A Post Hoc Analysis Among Biomedical Doctoral Students in Scandinavia
Journal article, Peer reviewed
MetadataShow full item record
Original versionJournal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. 2017, 12 (4), 199-205. 10.1177/1556264617714658
A precondition for reducing scientific misconduct is evidence about scientists’ attitudes. We need reliable survey instruments, and this study investigates the reliability of Kalichman’s “Survey 2: research misconduct” questionnaire. The study is a post hoc analysis of data from three surveys among biomedical doctoral students in Scandinavia (2010-2015). We perform reliability analysis, and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis using a split-sample design as a partial validation. The results indicate that a reliable 13-item scale can be formed (Cronbach’s α = .705), and factor analysis indicates that there are four reliable subscales each tapping a different construct: (a) general attitude to misconduct (α = .768), (b) attitude to personal misconduct (α = .784), (c) attitude to whistleblowing (α = .841), and (d) attitude to blameworthiness/punishment (α = .877). A full validation of the questionnaire requires further research. We, nevertheless, hope that the results will facilitate the increased use of the questionnaire in research.