Development of consensus on essential virtues for ethics and research integrity training using a modified Delphi approach

ABSTRACT

Most ethics and research integrity (ERI) training approaches are based on teaching moral rules, duties or responsibilities, often not sufficiently addressing virtue-based ethics. This study aimed to obtain a consensus among relevant experts on the importance of essential virtues for ERI training and their acquisitions. A modified Delphi consensus process was conducted in three rounds; 31 ERI experts participated in Round 1 and 23 in Round 2 and Round 3. Based on findings generated from qualitative data in Round 1, a structured questionnaire with 90 different statements grouped under five domains was developed for Round 2 and Round 3. After the final round, a consensus was achieved on two-thirds of statements included in this study. The experts agreed that virtues are based on learned and reflected attitudes and that the appropriate direction to acquire research virtues is through continuing education using case studies and discussions based on real-life scenarios. Furthermore, the consensus was obtained on 35 scientific virtues that should be stimulated in ERI training, prioritizing honesty, integrity, accountability, criticism and fairness as the most essential scientific virtues for good research practice. These results should be considered in developing or adjusting the ERI training program and materials.

KEYWORDS:

• Virtue
• ethics
• research integrity
• Delphi consensus process
• training

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all members of the VIRT²UE project consortium for their valuable contributions to this work.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Declaration statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare except receiving a grant from the European Commission for this work.

Additional information

Funding

This study was funded by the European Commission, grant No. 787580 (H2020-SwafS-2017-1) . The funder had no role in the design of this study, during its execution and data interpretation.