Validated RCR measures omit emerging and social-safety topics including EDI, whistleblower protections, AI use in research, predatory journals and open-science practices¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2029: tool and model accuracy changes quickly
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? No items in any measure addressed equity, diversity and inclusion, social safety or whistleblower protections. → M. van Loon 2026
q2 i? No items addressed public pre-registration, use of AI in research methods, predatory journals, or AI tools for writing manuscripts. → M. van Loon 2026
Evidence¶
M. van Loon 2026¶
M. van Loon, D. Crean, M. van den Hoven, J. Katsarov, N. Evans. (2026). How is the Impact of Responsible Conduct of Research Education Evaluated? A Review of Measures Used and a Content Analysis of Outcome Measures with Reported Validation Evidence. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-026-10187-8
q2 · i? · review · r2
Content-analysis findings on topic coverage gaps across the 15 measures. The discussion adds that "more recent threats to research integrity, such as the use of AI in research methods and reporting, and knowledge of predatory journals were not evaluated in measures" and that intellectual property and new biotech ethics were coded but absent.
"Other topics, which reflect more recent foci of RI guidance such as equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI), social safety and whistleblower protections, were not addressed by any item in any measure."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Fifteen unique RCR outcome measures with supporting validation evidence were identified, all covering research integrity but only ten covering research ethics
- Validation evidence across the 15 RCR measures is partial and heterogeneous, with no test–retest, criterion validity or factor-analytic evidence reported
- Most validated RCR measures assess a single learning outcome, with attitudes most common and only four measures testing knowledge
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
validated-rcr-measures-missing-topics-edi-ai-open-science |
title |
Validated RCR measures omit emerging and social-safety topics including EDI, whistleblower protections, AI use in research, predatory journals and open-science practices |
description |
Validated RCR measures omit emerging and social-safety topics including EDI, whistleblower protections, AI use in research, predatory journals and open-science practices |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2026 |
recheck_by |
2029 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-19 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — m-van-loon-2026 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.