Questionable research practices in engineering research

Misconduct in science is often associated with data fabrication, data falsification, and plagiarism. However, other practices are far more frequent and prevalent. Questionable Research Practices (QRPs) are in the grey area between misconduct and responsible research conduct. The goal of this study was to investigate estimated and self-admission prevalence of engineering researchers' engagement in QRPs. We applied a survey through a questionnaire that used 10 QRPs identified in relevant literature. The questionnaire was adapted to include several categories: individual, research group, research center, and country. Results indicate that self-admission engagement in QRPs is generally higher than in similar studies. Also, respondents are more keen to estimate that others engage in QRPs than they or their research group do. Respondents admit engagement in all QRPs presented, such as failing to report all of a study´s dependent measures relevant to a finding, selectively reporting studies related to a specific finding that "worked," or even falsifying data. While some consider these practices unjustifiable, others justify them with publication and time pressures. More studies on the QRP engagement of engineering researchers are needed to get a more precise picture.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
International journal of information systems and project management
Published
2026-01-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.12821/ijispm140101
Primary Topic
Academic integrity and plagiarism
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Questionable research practices in engineering research

Ana Alice Baptista, Filipe Pereira
International journal of information systems and project management
Academic integrity and plagiarism
article

Questionable research practices in engineering research

Ana Alice Baptista, Filipe Pereira
article en

Abstract

Misconduct in science is often associated with data fabrication, data falsification, and plagiarism. However, other practices are far more frequent and prevalent. Questionable Research Practices (QRPs) are in the grey area between misconduct and responsible research conduct. The goal of this study was to investigate estimated and self-admission prevalence of engineering researchers' engagement in QRPs. We applied a survey through a questionnaire that used 10 QRPs identified in relevant literature. The questionnaire was adapted to include several categories: individual, research group, research center, and country. Results indicate that self-admission engagement in QRPs is generally higher than in similar studies. Also, respondents are more keen to estimate that others engage in QRPs than they or their research group do. Respondents admit engagement in all QRPs presented, such as failing to report all of a study´s dependent measures relevant to a finding, selectively reporting studies related to a specific finding that "worked," or even falsifying data. While some consider these practices unjustifiable, others justify them with publication and time pressures. More studies on the QRP engagement of engineering researchers are needed to get a more precise picture.

International journal of information systems and project managementVol. 14(1)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 79%
Academic integrity and plagiarism
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Questionable research practices in engineering research — Ana Alice Baptista, Filipe Pereira · International journal of information systems and project management (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS