图书情报工作

图书情报工作 >

2025 , Vol. 69 >Issue 22: 33 - 43

DOI: https://doi.org/10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2025.22.003

专题：科研诚信治理的多维度探索与实践创新

科研人员数据伦理失范行为形成过程及影响因素研究

  • 孙俐丽 ,
  • 张潭 ,
  • 金咏诗
展开
  • 1 南京工业大学信息管理与技术研究所 南京 210009;
    2 南京工业大学经济与管理学院 南京 211816
孙俐丽，副教授，博士，硕士生导师，E-mail：llsun@njtech.edu.cn；张潭，硕士研究生；金咏诗，硕士研究生。

收稿日期: 2024-12-05

  修回日期: 2025-02-16

  网络出版日期: 2025-11-19

基金资助

本文系2025年江苏高校哲学社会科学研究重大项目“AI4S情境下科学数据伦理问题形成机理与治理策略研究”（项目编号：2025SJZD066）和2025年江苏省社会科学基金项目“AI背景下科学数据伦理问题的弱信号识别、形成机理及治理策略研究”（项目编号：25XZD002）研究成果之一。

收起

Study on the Formation Process and Influencing Factors of Data Ethical Misconduct by Researchers

  • Sun Lili ,
  • Zhang Tan ,
  • Jin Yongshi
Expand
  • 1 Institute of Information Management and Technology, Nanjing University of Technology, Nanjing 210009;
    2 School of Economics and Management, Nanjing University of Technology, Nanjing 211816
Sun Lili, Associate Professor, PhD, Master’s Supervisor, E-mail: llsun@njtech.edu.cn; Zhang Tan, Master’s Candidate; Jin Yongshi, Master’s Candidate.

Received date: 2024-12-05

  Revised date: 2025-02-16

  Online published: 2025-11-19

Supported by

This work is supported by the 2025 Major Project of Philosophy and Social Science Research in Colleges and Universities in Jiangsu Province titled “Research on the Formation Mechanism and Governance Strategy of Scientific Data Ethical Issues in the Context of AI4S (Grant No. 2025SJZD066), and the 2025 Jiangsu Provincial Social Science Fund Project “Research on Weak Signal Identification, Formation Mechanism, and Governance Strategies of Ethical Issues in Scientific Data under the Background of AI” (Grant No. 25XZD002).

Fold

摘要

[目的/意义] 分析科研人员在数据处理和分析过程中数据伦理失范行为的形成过程及影响因素，旨在揭示伦理失范行为形成规律，为改进科研伦理规范和优化科研管理提供理论支持。[方法/过程] 对25个半结构化访谈文本及网络相关主题文本进行混合数据的扎根理论分析，构建科研人员数据伦理失范行为形成过程及影响因素模型。[结果/结论] 数据伦理认知是科研人员伦理判断与规范遵循的基础；科研人员的伦理决策存在道义与效用的动态博弈：既可能在规范明确、监督完善时呈现道义论主导的“规范内化”，也可能在资源竞争激烈时出现目的论驱动的伦理失范行为；情境因素的结构性矛盾与情景因素的即时压力形成共振效应，促使宏观制度缺陷转化为微观失范行为；自我调节与外部控制构成双重防线，但效力依赖情境支持。

关键词： 科学数据伦理; 伦理失范行为; 科研人员; 扎根理论

本文引用格式

孙俐丽 , 张潭 , 金咏诗 . 科研人员数据伦理失范行为形成过程及影响因素研究[J]. 图书情报工作, 2025 , 69(22) : 33 -43 . DOI: 10.13266/j.issn.0252-3116.2025.22.003

Abstract

[Purpose/Significance] This paper analyzes the formation process and influencing factors of data ethical misconduct of researchers in the process of data processing and analysis, aiming at revealing its formation patterns, and providing theoretical support for the improvement of research ethical guidelines and optimization of scientific research management. [Method/Process] Based on the grounded theory this paper analyzed the mixed data from 25 semi-structured interview texts and related online topic texts, and constructed a model of the formation process and influencing factors of data ethical misconduct of researchers. [Result/Conclusion] Data ethics cognition forms the foundation for researchers’ ethical judgment and adherence to normative standards. Researchers’ ethical decision-making entails a dynamic interplay between deontological and teleological considerations. Under conditions of clear norms and robust oversight, deontological imperatives lead to “norm internalization,” whereas in intensely competitive resource environments, teleologically driven ethical misconduct may occur. The resonance between the structural contradictions of contextual factors and immediate situational pressures facilitates the transformation of macro-level institutional deficiencies into micro-level ethical deviations. Self-regulation and external controls serve as dual defensive mechanisms, although their effectiveness is contingent upon contextual support.

Key words： scientific data ethics; ethical misconduct; scientific researchers; grounded theory

参考文献

[1] 梁宇, 郑易平. 科研数据共享中的数据伦理问题研究[J]. 中国科技论坛, 2022(1): 22-27. (LIANG Y, ZHENG Y P. Research on data ethics in scientific research data sharing[J]. Forum on science and technology in China, 2022(1): 22-27.)
[2] FLORIDI L, TADDEO M. What is data ethics?[J]. Philosophical transactions of the royal society: a mathematical, physical and engineering sciences, 2016, 374(2083): 20160360.
[3] 张月红. 科研伦理, 从何谈起[J]. 科技导报, 2022, 40(18): 95-100. (ZHANG Y H. Academic ethics: where to start[J]. Science & technology review, 2022, 40(18): 95-100.)
[4] 易耀森. 被撤销医学论文数据学术不端行为与防范对策研究[J]. 中国科技期刊研究, 2020, 31(3): 276-280. (YI Y S. Data academic misconduct in retracted medical articles and precautionary measures[J]. Chinese journal of scientific and technical periodicals, 2020, 31(3): 276-280.)
[5] SHAW D, MCMASTER R, NEWHOLM T. Care and commitment in ethical consumption: an exploration of the ‘attitude-behaviour gap’[J]. Journal of business ethics, 2016, 136(2): 251-265.
[6] VERMILLION L J, LASSAR W M, WINSOR R D. The Hunt-Vitell general theory of marketing ethics: can it enhance our understanding of principal-agent relationships in channels of distribution?[J]. Journal of business ethics, 2002, 41, 267-285.
[7] 陈美, 梁乙凯. 开放政府数据隐私风险控制中个人数据匿名化研究[J]. 图书馆学研究, 2021(11): 66-71. (CHEN M, LIANG Y K. A research on anonymization of personal data in open government data privacy risk control[J]. Researches in library science, 2021(11): 66-71.)
[8] 马海群, 李金玲, 于同同, 等. 全生命周期视阈下公共数据伦理准则框架研究[J]. 农业图书情报学报, 2023, 35(6): 29-42. (MA H Q, LI J L, YU T T, et al. A framework of ethics guidelines on public data from a whole life cycle perspective[J]. Journal of library and information science in agriculture, 2023, 35(6): 29-42.)
[9] ZIMMER M. “But the data is already public”: on the ethics of research in facebook[J]. Ethics and information technology, 2010, 12(4): 313-325.
[10] 董军, 程昊. 大数据技术的伦理风险及其控制——基于国内大数据伦理问题研究的分析[J]. 自然辩证法研究, 2017, 33(11): 80-85. (DONG J, CHENG H. Risks and control of big data technology: analysis based on the research on the ethical issues of big data in China[J]. Studies in dialectics of nature, 2017, 33(11): 80-85.)
[11] 凡景强, 邢思聪. 大数据伦理研究进展、理论框架及其启示[J]. 情报杂志, 2023, 42(3): 167-173. (FAN J Q, XING S C. Research progress, theoretical framework and enlightenment of big data ethics[J]. Journal of information, 2023, 42(3): 167-173.)
[12] 张涛, 马海群. 智能情报分析中数据与算法风险识别模型构建研究[J]. 情报学报, 2022, 41(8): 832-844. (ZHANG T, MA H Q. Research on the construction of data and algorithm risk identification model in intelligent intelligence analysis[J]. Journal of the China Society for Scientific and Technical Information, 2022, 41(8): 832-844.)
[13] 姚霖, 陈林昊, 范冬萍. 数据伦理治理系统的价值协同机制[J]. 系统科学学报, 2024(4): 69-74. (YAO L, CHEN L H, FAN D P. Value synergy mechanism for data ethics governance system[J]. Chinese journal of systems science, 2024(4): 69-74.)
[14] 樊岳红. 人才培养与科研诚信之张力的系统反思[J]. 系统科学学报, 2021, 29(4): 45-50. (FAN Y H. A systematic reflection on the tension between talent cultivation and scientific research integrity[J]. Chinese journal of systems science, 2021, 29(4): 4-50.)
[15] MUÑOZ-CANTERO J M, ESPIÑEIRA-BELLÓN E M. Intelligent plagiarism as a misconduct in academic integrity[J]. Acta médica portuguesa, 2023, 37(1): 1-2.
[16] 峗怡. 论生物医学科研不端的失范原因及防治策略[J]. 中国卫生事业管理, 2020, 37(4): 302-304. (WEI Y. Study on caues and combating strategies of scientific misconduct in the field of bio-medical research[J]. Chinese health service management, 2020, 37(4): 302-304.)
[17] 陈传夫, 焦钰巧. 科研伦理规范的调查与体系优化研究[J]. 中国科技论坛, 2020(5): 24-31, 40. (CHEN C F, JIAO Y Q. Investigation on research ethical norms and strategies for system optimization[J]. Forum on science and technology in China, 2020(5): 24-31, 40.)
[18] 李欣哲, 鲁晓. “约束”与“内化”：科研人员伦理意识提升路径研究[J]. 科学学研究, 2024, 42(3): 449-459. (LI X Z, LU X. “Constraint” and “Internalization”: Research on the paths to improve the ethics consciousness of scientific researchers[J]. Studies in science of science, 2024, 42(3): 449-459.)
[19] 胡良霖, 朱艳华, 李坤, 等. 科学数据伦理关键问题研究[J]. 中国科技资源导刊, 2022, 54(1): 11-20. (HU L L, ZHU Y H, LI K, et al. Research on key issues of scientific data ethics[J]. China science & technology resources review, 2022, 54(1): 11-20.)
[20] 赵君, 刘钰婧, 赵书松, 等. 科研情绪耗竭如何诱发科研不端行为：基于自我损耗理论的解释[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理, 2021, 42(2): 30-44. (ZHAO J, LIU Y J, ZHAO S S, et al. How scientific emotional exhaustion leads to scientific misconducts: from the perspective of ego depletion theory[J]. Science of science and management of S & T, 2021, 42(2): 30-44.)
[21] 刘金亚, 顾立平, 张潇月, 等. 开放科研数据环境下科研人员的数据伦理框架研究[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2021, 44(2): 83-89. (LIU J Y, GU L P, ZHANG X Y, et al. Framework of data ethics for researchers in open research data environment[J]. Information studies: theory & application, 2021, 44(2): 83-89.)
[22] 梁宇. 大数据时代科研数据伦理问题及其规制[J]. 图书馆, 2023(7): 75-81. (LIANG Y. Ethical issues and their regulations of scientific research data in the Era of Big Data[J]. Library, 2023(7): 75-81.)
[23] LIEM G A D. Achievement and motivation[J]. Educational psychology, 2021, 41(4): 379-382.
[24] SHEERAN P, WEBB T L. The intention-behavior gap[J]. Social and personality psychology compass, 2016, 10(9): 503-518.
[25]张磊, 张敏, 张艳. 用户社交知识行为研究的系统综述[J]. 情报理论与实践, 2019, 42(8): 144-152. (ZHANG L, ZHANG M, ZHANG Y. Systematic review of social knowledge behaviors of users [J]. Information studies: theory & application, 2019, 42(8): 144-152.)
[26] VINES T H, ALBERT A Y K, ANDREW R L, et al. The availability of research data declines rapidly with article age[J]. Current biology: CB, 2014, 24(1): 94-97.
[27] WILSON T D. Models in information behaviour research[J]. Journal of documentation, 1999, 55(3): 249-270.
[28] EICKHOFF C. Cognitive biases in crowdsourcing[C]//Proceedings of the eleventh ACM international conference on Web search and data mining. Los Angeles: ACM, 2018: 162-170.
Options
文章导航

/

〈 〉