Procedural Injustice in the System of Peer Review and Scientific Misconduct
研究认为同行评审中的程序不公正会引发学者对评审体系的愤世嫉俗，降低其遵守科研规范的义务感，从而助长科研不端行为，并探讨个体差异和工作环境的影响。
Scientific misconduct, an alarming problem in the social and natural sciences, is rarely addressed through systematic research. Why do scholars do it? Using a group engagement model of procedural justice, I make the case that procedural injustice in the peer-review system encourages scientific misconduct by generating feelings of cynicism about the legitimacy of the peer-review system and by lowering scholars’ felt-obligation to abide by accepted norms for scientific conduct. Only a subset of scholars engage in scientific misconduct despite conditions of procedural injustice; therefore, I also explore the direct and indirect effects of individual differences and local work context.