Shaping and reflection on the responsible conduct of research among clinical researchers from the perspective of reinforcement theory
10.12026/j.issn.1001-8565.2026.10.07
- VernacularTitle:强化理论视域下临床研究者负责任研究行为塑造与思考
- Author:
Meihua YE
1
;
Lingqian ZHANG
2
;
Yi LU
2
;
Pin WANG
1
;
Bin CAI
3
;
Luojing ZHOU
4
Author Information
1. Yangzhou Clinical Medical College of Dalian Medical University， Yangzhou 225001， China
2. School of Nursing & School of Public Health， Yangzhou University， Yangzhou 225009， China
3. Institute of Hospital Management， Northern Jiangsu People’s Hospital， Yangzhou 225001， China
4. Department of Science and Technology， Northern Jiangsu People’s Hospital， Yangzhou 225001， China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
responsible conduct of research;
clinical researcher;
behavior shaping;
reinforcement theory;
research integrity
- From:
Chinese Medical Ethics
2026;39(10):1330-1335
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
High-quality clinical research represents the scientific foundation for generating credible medical evidence， guiding evidence-based practice， and optimizing public health strategies. The responsible conduct of research by clinical researchers serves as the core guarantee of research quality. Any act of research misconduct will not only result in the waste of research resources and damage the reputation of relevant individuals and institutions， but also undermine the validity of research evidence， mislead evidence-based medical practice， raise risks for public health decision-making， and ultimately impede the progress of medical innovation. Based on the framework of reinforcement theory， this paper elaborated on the internal correlation between reinforcement theory and the shaping of responsible conduct of research among clinical researchers， and demonstrated the necessity of shaping responsible conduct of research in the new context. It also summarized practical challenges encountered in such shaping， such as utilitarian-oriented research evaluation， complex conflicts of interest， inadequate review and supervision， constrained research resources， and insufficient education on responsible conduct of research. It further proposed countermeasures that were conducive to shaping the responsible research conduct of clinical researchers. These encompassed reconstructing the orientation of performance evaluation， dynamically managing risks arising from conflicts of interest， implementing precise constraints via ethical supervision， arranging tiered resource support， and internalizing cultural recognition of responsible research conduct.
