<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="6.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><rec-number>6854</rec-number><ref-type>Journal Article</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Broome, Marion</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pryor, Erica</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Habermann, Barbara</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pulley, Leavonne</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Kincaid, Harold</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Scientific Misconduct Questionnaire—Revised (SMQ-R): Validation and Psychometric Testing</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Accountability in Research: Policies &amp; Quality Assurance</style></secondary-title><short-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Scientific Misconduct Questionnaire—Revised (SMQ-R): Validation and Psychometric Testing</style></short-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ASSOCIATIONS</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Clinical</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">etc.</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">FACTOR</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">institutions</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">MEDICINE</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Misconduct</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">PSYCHOMETRICS</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Questionnaires</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">research</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">SCIENCE</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Scientific</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">SURVEYS</style></keyword></keywords><taxonomies><taxonomy><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Misconduct</style></taxonomy><taxonomy><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Science </style></taxonomy><taxonomy><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Medicine</style></taxonomy></taxonomies><pubtype><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal Article</style></pubtype><audience-level><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ug</style></audience-level><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></year></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">12</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">263-280</style></pages><issn><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">08989621</style></issn><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The overall purposes of this article are to report the development of a survey instrument, Scientific Misconduct Questionnaire-Revised (SMQ-R) that elicits the perceptions of research coordinators managing clinical trials about the various aspects of scientific misconduct and to present the psychometric analyses for the SMQ-R. The current effort demonstrated the usefulness of the SMQ-R in obtaining information from a national sample of experienced research coordinators about their perceptions of the prevalence of different types of scientific misconduct and of factors that influence the occurrence of misconduct. The psychometric evaluation of the SMQ-R suggests good internal consistency for most subscales and suggests adequate construct validity of the instrument as a whole. </style></abstract><doi><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">10.1080/08989620500440253</style></doi><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">4</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Article</style></work-type><accession-num><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">19302189</style></accession-num><notes><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Broome, Marion 1; Email Address: mbroome@iupui.edu; Pryor, Erica 2; Habermann, Barbara 2; Pulley, Leavonne 3; Kincaid, Harold 4; Affiliations: 1: School of Nursing, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA; 2: School of Nursing, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA; 3: College of Public Health, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA; 4: Department of Philosophy, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA; Issue Info: Oct-Dec2005, Vol. 12 Issue 4, p263; Thesaurus Term: QUESTIONNAIRES; Thesaurus Term: RESEARCH; Thesaurus Term: ASSOCIATIONS, institutions, etc.; Thesaurus Term: MISCONDUCT in office; Subject Term: SURVEYS; Subject Term: CLINICAL trials; Subject Term: FACTOR analysis; Subject Term: PSYCHOMETRICS; Author-Supplied Keyword: research integrity; Author-Supplied Keyword: scientific misconduct; Number of Pages: 18p; Illustrations: 4 Charts; Document Type: Article</style></notes></record></records></xml>