An analysis of functional relationships between systemic conditions and unethical behavior in German academia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15626/MP.2023.4097Keywords:
Science, Reform, Meta-Science, Misconduct, SystemAbstract
This paper is an updated English version of a report filed by a commission that the German Psychological Society (DGPs) appointed in 2022. The commission’s task was a) to identify factors in the academic system that enable and/or promote unethical behavior, and b) to propose corrective measures. Based on expert interviews, a literature review, feedback from the community, and discussions within the commission, the following problematic issues were identified: (P1) negligent or fraudulent research practices, (P2) abuse of power, (P3) inadequate supervision of Early Career Researchers, (P4) poor quality of teaching, (P5) counterproductive incentives, (P6) overburdening of professors with tasks, (P7) fixed-term and short-term employment, (P8) unnecessarily strong power imbalance, (P9) an ineffective peer-review system, (P10) questionable assessment practices in hiring professors, (P11) lack of clarity of, and low commitment to, ethical standards, and (P12) weak control and sanctioning mechanisms. The commission offers concrete recommendations for changes to the academic system that should make the occurrence of unethical behavior less likely. Even though some of these recommendations might be rather specific for the field of psychology and for the German academic system, most of them may be valid for science in general.
References
Abele-Brehm, A. E., & Bühner, M. (2016a). Überlegungen zur Optimierung von Berufungsverfahren in der Psychologie. Psychologische Rundschau, 67(4), 262–268. https://doi.org/10.1026/0033-3042/a000333
Abele-Brehm, A. E., & Bühner, M. (2016b). Wer soll die Professur bekommen? [Who shall get the professorship?] Psychologische Rundschau, 67(4), 250–261. https://doi.org/10.1026/0033-3042/a000335
Allen, L., Scott, J., Brand, A., Hlava, M., & Altman, M. (2014). Publishing: Credit where credit is due. Nature, 508(7496), 312–313. https://doi.org/10.1038/508312a
Anvari, F., Alsalti, T., Oehler, L. A., Zach, M., Hussey, I., Elson, M., & Arslan, R. C. (2025). A fragmented field: Construct and measure proliferation in psychology. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 8(3), Article 25152459251360642. https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459251360642
Arcudi, A., Cumurovic, A., Gotter, C., Graeber, D., Joly, P., Ott, V., Schanze, J.-L., Thater, S., Weltin, M., & Yenikent, S. (2019). Doctoral Researchers in the Leibniz Association: Final Report of the 2017 Leibniz PhD Survey. Leibniz PhD Network. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-61363-9
Basile, K. C., D’Inverno, A. S., & Wang, J. (2020). National prevalence of sexual violence by a workplace-related perpetrator. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 58(2), 216–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2019.09.011
Beadle, B., Do, S., El Youssoufi, D., Felder, D., Gorenflos López, J., Jahn, A., Pérez-Bosch Quesada, E., Rottleb, T., Rüter, F., Schanze, J.-L., Stroppe, A.-K., Thater, S., Verrière, A., & Weltin, M. (2020). Being a doctoral researcher in the Leibniz Association: 2019 Leibniz PhD Network Survey Report. Leibniz PhD Network. https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/69403
Block, J. (1995). A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description. Psychological Bulletin, 117(2), 187–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.2.187
Borkenau, P. (2012). Not all authorships are created equal. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 10(3), 147–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/15366367.2012.720192
Brachem, J., Frank, M., Kvetnaya, T., Schramm, L. F., & Volz, L. (2022). Replication crisis, p-hacking and Open Science: A survey of questionable research practices in student projects and impulses for teaching. Psychologische Rundschau, 73(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1026/0033-3042/a000562
Cain, N. M., Pincus, A. L., & Ansell, E. B. (2008). Narcissism at the crossroads: Phenotypic description of pathological narcissism across clinical theory, social/personality psychology, and psychiatric diagnosis. Clinical Psychology Review, 28(4), 638–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2007.09.006
Chapman, C. A., Bicca-Marques, J. C., Calvignac-Spencer, S., Fan, P., Fashing, P. J., Gogarten, J., Guo, S., Hemingway, C. A., Leendertz, F., Li, B., Matsuda, I., Hou, R., Serio-Silva, J. C., & Stenseth, N. C. (2019). Games academics play and their consequences: How authorship, h-index and journal impact factors are shaping the future of academia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 286(1916), 20192047. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.2047
Christian, K., Johnstone, C., Larkins, J.-a., Wright, W., & Doran, M. R. (2021). A survey of early-career researchers in Australia. eLife, 10. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.60613
Cohen, A., & Baruch, Y. (2022). Abuse and exploitation of doctoral students: A conceptual model for traversing a long and winding road to academia. Journal of Business Ethics, 180, 505–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04905-1
Corstjens, J., Lievens, F., & Krumm, S. (2017). Situational judgement tests for selection. In H. W. Goldstein, E. D. Pulakos, J. Passmore, & C. Semedo (Eds.), The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Recruitment, Selection, and Employee Retention (pp. 226–246). Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118972472.ch11
Czesnick, H. (2020). Konflikte im Zusammenhang mit Autorschaften und Datennutzung – Erfahrungen des "Ombudsman für die Wissenschaft". https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4723737
Deutsches Zentrum für Hochschul- und Wissenschafts-forschung (DZHW). (2024). Barometer für die Wissenschaft: Ergebnisse der Wissenschaftsbefragung 2023. Deutsches Zentrum für Hochschul-und Wissenschaftsforschung. https://www.bmbf.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/2023/dzhw-wissenschaftsbefragung.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=4
DGPs Board of Directors. (2022). #IchBinHanna: Tenure-Track anstatt Befristung (Pressemit-teilung). https://www.dgps.de/aktuelles/details/ichbinhanna-tenure-track-anstatt-befristung/
Dhanani, L. Y., LaPalme, M. L., & Joseph, D. L. (2021). How prevalent is workplace mistreatment? A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(8), 1082–1098. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2534
Elson, M. (2024). Pay researchers to spot errors in published papers. Nature, 629. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01465-y
Elson, M., Fiedler, S., Kirsch, P., & Stahl, J. (2021). Bericht des Ombudsgremiums der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Psychologie – DGPs [OSF Preprint]. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/MK9ST
Errington, T. M., Denis, A., Perfito, N., Iorns, E., & Nosek, B. A. (2021). Reproducibility in cancer biology: Challenges for assessing replicability in preclinical cancer biology. eLife, 10, e67995. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.67995
European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. (2021). Towards a reform of the research assessment system: Scoping report. European Commission. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/707440
Eva, N., Howard, J. L., Liden, R. C., Morin, A. J. S., & Schwarz, G. (2025). An inconvenient truth: A comprehensive examination of the added value (or lack thereof) of leadership measures. Journal of Management Studies, 62, 3072–3117. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13156
Evans, N., Buljan, I., Valenti, E., et al. (2022). Stakeholders’ experiences of research integrity support in universities: A qualitative study in three European countries. Science and Engineering Ethics, 28, 43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00390-5
Falagas, M. E., & Alexiou, V. G. (2008). The top-ten in journal impact factor manipulation. Archivum Immunologiae et Therapiae Experimentalis, 56, 223–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00005-008-0024-5
Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? a systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS ONE, 4(5), e5738. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0005738
Flake, J. K., & Fried, E. I. (2020). Measurement schmeasurement: Questionable measurement practices and how to avoid them. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3(4), 456–465. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920952393
Fong, E. A., & Wilhite, A. W. (2017). Authorship and citation manipulation in academic research. PLoS ONE, 12(12), e0187394. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187394
Forster, N., & Lund, D. W. (2018). Identifying and dealing with functional psychopathic behavior in higher education. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 38(1), 22–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.21897
Frank, M., Miller, B., Vosskuhl, J., Zänkert, S., Hesselmann, F., & Joliffe, J. (2024). Error needs culture! Exploring the relationship between error culture and openness [Preprint]. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/kruhn_v2
Frith, U. (2020). Fast lane to slow science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(1), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.10.007
Gärtner, A., Leising, D., Freyer, N., Musfeld, P., Lange, J., & Schönbrodt, F. D. (2025). Responsible Research Assessment II: A specific proposal for hiring and promotion in psychology. Meta-Psychology, 9, MP.2024.4604. https://doi.org/10.15626/MP.2024.4604
Gasparyan, A. Y., Ayvazyan, L., & Kitas, G. D. (2013). Authorship problems in scholarly journals: Considerations for authors, peer reviewers and editors. Rheumatology International, 33, 277–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00296-012-2582-2
Hachmeister, C.-D. (2019). Im Blickpunkt: Promotionen als Indikator für die Leistung von Hochschulen. Auswertung von Daten des Statistischen Bundesamtes und des CHE Rankings 2019/20. Centrum für Hochschulentwicklung. Gütersloh, Germany.
Höbel, M., Durglishvili, A., Reinold, J., & Leising, D. (2022). Sexual harassment and coercion in German academia: A large-scale survey study. Sexual Offending: Theory, Research, and Prevention, 17, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.5964/sotrap.9349
Hodson, G., Book, A., Visser, B. A., Volk, A. A., Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2018). Is the Dark Triad common factor distinct from low Honesty-Humility? Journal of Research in Personality, 73, 123–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2017.11.012
Hoffmann, B., Beyer, M., Rohe, J., Gensichen, J., & Gerlach, F. M. (2008). ‘Every error counts’: A web-based incident reporting and learning system for general practice. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 17(4), 307–312. https://doi.org/10.1136/qshc.2006.018440
Horbach, S. P. J. M., Breit, E., Halffman, W., & Mamelund, S.-E. (2020). On the willingness to report and the consequences of reporting research misconduct: The role of power relations. Science and Engineering Ethics, 26(3), 1595– 1623. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00202-8
Illinger, P. (2019). Widerstand gegen die Wahrheit [Resistance against the truth]. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/wissen/niels-birbaumer-locked-in-syndrom-als-1.4478914 Institut für Demoskopie Allensbach. (2019). Forschungs-freiheit an deutschen Universitäten: Ergebnisse einer Online-Umfrage unter Professoren und wissenschaftlichen Mitarbeitern (IfD-Bericht Nr. 8724). Allensbacher Archiv.
Jackenroll, B., & Julmi, C. (2018). Sind deutsche Professoren ausgebrannt? Burnout und dessen Folgen für die Leistungserstellung in deutschen Universitäten [Are German professors burnt out? Burnout and its consequences for performance in German universities]. Hochschulmanagement, 13, 34–40.
John, L. K., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2012). Measuring the prevalence of questionable research practices with incentives for truth telling. Psychological Science, 23(5), 524–532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611430953
Kasten, N., Freund, P. A., & Staufenbiel, T. (2020). "Sweet little lies": An in-depth analysis of faking behaviour on Situational Judgment Tests compared to personality questionnaires. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 36(1), 136–148. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000479
Katsarov, J., Andorno, R., Krom, A., et al. (2022). Effective strategies for research integrity training—a meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 34, 935–955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09630-9
Kis, A., Tur, E. M., Lakens, D., Vaesen, K., & Houkes, W. (2022). Leaving academia: PhD attrition and unhealthy research environments. PLoS ONE, 17(10), e0274976. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0274976
Kohrs, F. E., Auer, S., Bannach-Brown, A., Fiedler, S., Haven, T. L., Heise, V., Weissgerber, T. L., et al. (2023). Eleven strategies for making reproducible research and Open Science training the norm at research institutions [Preprint]. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/kcvra
Kreitzer, R. J., & Sweet-Cushman, J. (2021). Evaluating student evaluations of teaching: A review of measurement and equity bias in SETs and recommendations for ethical reform. Journal of Academic Ethics, 20(1), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-021-09400-w
Kuhnt, M., Reitz, T., & Wöhrle, P. (2022). Arbeiten unter dem Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetz: Eine Evaluation von Befristungsrecht und -Realität an deutschen Universitäten. Qucosa. Dresden. https://mittelbau.net/evaluation-des-wisszeitvg/
Lasser, J., Bultema, L., Jahn, A., Löffler, M., Minneker, V., & van Scherpenberg, C. (2021). Power abuse and anonymous accusations in academia: Perspectives from early career researchers and recommendations for improvement. Contributions to Higher Education Research, 43(1-2), 48–61.
Leising, D., Gärtner, A., & Schönbrodt, F. (2025). Responsible research assessments (parts I and II): Responses to the commentaries. Meta-Psychology, 9, MP.2024.4603. https://doi.org/10.15626/MP.2024.4603
Leising, D., Liesefeld, H., Buecker, S., Glöckner, A., & Lortsch, S. (2024). A tentative roadmap for consensus building processes. Personality Science, 5. https://doi.org/10.1177/27000710241298610
Leising, D., Thielmann, I., Glöckner, A., Gärtner, A., & Schönbrodt, F. (2022a). Ten steps towards a better personality science – how quality may be rewarded more in research evaluation. Personality Science, 3, 1–44. https://doi.org/10.5964/ps.6029
Leising, D., Thielmann, I., Glöckner, A., Gärtner, A., & Schönbrodt, F. (2022b). Ten steps towards a better personality science – a rejoinder to the comments. Personality Science, 3, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.5964/ps.7961
Lemser, S. (2019). Das Für und Wider einer Karriere in der Wissenschaft: Geschlechtsunterschiede bei Studierenden und Promovierenden am Bereich MatNat der TU Dresden [The pros and cons of a career in science: Gender differences in students and ECRs at TU Dresden’s school of science] 29 [Master’s thesis, Technische Universität Dresden] [Unpublished Master’s thesis].
Löwe, P. S., & Valet, P. (2023). Ist der öffentliche Dienst noch ein attraktiver Arbeitgeber? Veränderte Wahrnehmungen zu Jobsicherheit, langfristiger Beschäftigung und Karriereperspektiven von Beschäftigten im öffentlichen Dienst und der Privatwirtschaft von 1985 bis 2018. Zeitschrift für Sozialreform, 69(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1515/zsr-2022-0105
Lynam, D. R., Hyatt, C. S., Hopwood, C. J., Wright, A. G. C., & Miller, J. D. (2019). Should psychologists sign their reviews? Some thoughts and some data. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 128(6), 541–546. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000426
Mackie, S. A., & Bates, G. W. (2018). Contribution of the doctoral education environment to PhD candidates’ mental health problems: A scoping review. Higher Education Research & Development, 38(3), 565–578. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2018.1556620
Marcus, B., Lee, K., & Ashton, M. C. (2007). Personality dimensions explaining relationships between integrity tests and counterproductive behaviour: Big five, or one in addition? Personnel Psychology, 60(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00063.x
Martin, K. D., & Cullen, J. B. (2006). Continuities and extensions of ethical climate theory: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9084-7
Mete, Y. A. (2013). Relationship between organizational cynicism and ethical leadership behaviour: A study at higher education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 89, 476–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.08.880
Miller, J. D., Phillips, N. L., & Lynam, D. R. (2025). Questionable research practices violate the American Psychological Association’s Code of Ethics. Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science, 134(2), 113–114. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000974
Moshagen, M., Hilbig, B. E., & Zettler, I. (2018). The dark core of personality. Psychological Review, 125(5), 656–688. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000111
Müller, W. (2015). Assessment Center in Berufungsverfahren der Universität Bremen. In C. Peus, S. Braun, T. Hentschel, & D. Frey (Eds.), Personalauswahl in der wissenschaft (pp. 261–267). Springer.
Neumann, R. (2019). Bitte publik machen, aber ohne meinen Namen! [Please publicize, but without my name]. https://www.laborjournal.de/blog/?p=10331
Nielsen, M. B., Matthiesen, S. B., & Einarsen, S. (2010). The impact of methodological moderators on prevalence rates of workplace bullying: A meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 955–979. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317909X481256
Niemann, Y. F., Muhs, G. G. y., & Gonzalez, C. G. (Eds.). (2020). Presumed incompetent II: Race, class, power, and resistance of women in academia. Utah State University Press.
Olsthoorn, L. H. M., Heckmann, L. A., Filippi, A., Vieira, R. M., Varanasi, R. S., Lasser, J., Bäuerle, F., Zeis, P., & Schulte-Sasse, R. (2020). PhDnet Report 2019. https://pure.mpg.de/pubman/faces/ViewItemOverviewPage.jsp?itemId=item_3243876_4
Ones, D. S., & Viswesvaran, C. (2001). Integrity tests and other criterion-focused occupational personality scales (COPS) used in personnel selection. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 9(1-2), 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00161
Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Schmidt, F. L. (1993). Comprehensive meta-analysis of integrity test validities: Findings and implications for personnel selection and theories of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4), 679–703. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.4.679
Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Schmidt, F. L. (2012). Integrity tests predict counterproductive work behavior and job performance well: Comment on Van Iddekinge, Roth, Raymark, and OdleDusseau (2012). Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(3), 537–542. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024825
Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716
Palmer, J. C., Holmes, R. M., & Perrewé, P. L. (2020). The cascading effects of CEO dark triad personality on subordinate behaviour and firm performance: A multilevel theoretical model. Group & Organization Management, 45(2), 143–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601120905728
Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(6), 556–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00505-6
Peukert, K., Jacobi, L., Geuer, J., Paredes Cisneros, I., Löffler, M., Lienig, T., Taylor, S., Gusic, M., Novakovic, N., Kuhl, T., Ordini, E., Runge, A., Samoylov, O., Härtel, M., Amend, A.-L., & Nagel, M. (2020). Survey Report 2019. Helmholtz Juniors. https://www.helmholtz.de/fileadmin/user_upload/06_jobs_talente/Helmholtz-Juniors/Survey_Report2019.pdf
Peus, C., Braun, S., Hentschel, T., & Frey, D. (Eds.). (2015). Personnel Selection in Science. Springer. Prieß-Buchheit, J., Aro, A. R., Demirova, I., Lanzerath, D., Stoev, P., & Wilder, N. (2020). Rotatory role-playing and role-models to enhance the research integrity culture. Research Ideas and Outcomes, 6, e53921. https://doi.org/10.3897/rio.6.e53921
Pruschak, G., & Hopp, C. (2022). And the credit goes to... ghost and honorary authorship among social scientists. PLoS ONE, 17(5), e0267312. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267312
Rahal, R.-M., Fiedler, S., Adetula, A., Berntsson, R. P.-A., Dirnagl, U., Feld, G. B., Fiebach, C. J., Himi, S. A., Horner, A. J., & Lonsdorf, T. B. (2023). Quality research needs good working conditions. Nature Human Behaviour, 7(2), 164–167. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01508-2
Regler, B., Einhorn, L., Lasser, J., Vögele, M., Elizarova, S., Bäuerle, F., Wu, C., Förste, S., Shenolikar, J., & Group 2018, PhDnet. (2019). PhDnet Report 2018. Max Planck PhDNet. https://doi.org/10.17617/2.3052826
Rennie, D. (2016). Let’s make peer review scientific. Nature, 535, 31–33. https://doi.org/10.1038/535031a
Richardson, M., & Healy, M. (2019). Examining the ethical environment in higher education. British Educational Research Journal, 45(6), 1089–1104.
Scheffel, C., Korb, F., Dörfel, D., Scherbaum, S., et al. (2023). Gute wissenschaftliche Praxis und Open Science im Empiriepraktikum: Wissenschaftlicher Kompetenzerwerb durch Replikationsstudien. Psychologische Rundschau, 74(4), 241–243. https://doi.org/10.1026/0033-3042/a000643
Scherpenberg, C., Bultema, L., Jahn, A., Löffler, M., Minneker, V., & Lasser, J. (2021). Manifestations of power abuse in academia and how to prevent them. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4608392
Schönbrodt, F. D., Gärtner, A., Frank, M., Gollwitzer, M., Ihle, M., Mischkowski, D., Phan, L. V., Schmitt, M., Scheel, A. M., Schubert, A.-L., Steinberg, U., & Leising, D. (2025). Responsible Research Assessment I: Implementing DORA and CoARA for hiring and promotion in psychology. Meta-Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.15626/MP.2024.4601
Schraudner, M., Striebing, C., & Hochfeld, K. (2019). Work culture and work atmosphere in the Max Planck Society. Fraunhofer IAO. https://www.mpg.de/14284109/mpg-arbeitskultur-ergebnisbericht-englisch.pdf
Sommer, J., Jongmanns, G., Book, A., & Rennert, C. (2022). Evaluation des novellierten Wissenschaftszeitvertragsgesetzes. Interval GmbH & Institut für Hochschulentwicklung e.V. https://www.bmbf.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/de/2022/abschlussbericht- evaluation- wisszeitvg.html
Specht, J., Hof, C., Tjus, J., Pernice, W., & Endesfelder, U. (2017). Departments statt Lehrstühle: Moderne Personalstruktur für eine zukunftsfähige Wissenschaft. AG Wissenschaftspolitik der Jungen Akademie.
Stahl, J., Bössel-Debbert, N., Elson, M., Fiedler, S., Kirsch, P., Kluge, A., Leising, D., Mischkowski, D., Phan, L., Richter, F., & Schmitt, M. (2024). Machtmissbrauch an Universitäten: Strukturelle Ursachen und Ebenen potentieller Maßnahmen. Beitrag zur Ringvorlesung: Missbrauchte Macht. Universität Würzburg. https://www.psychologie.uni-wuerzburg.de/fileadmin/060-grk2660/2024/Stahl_Wuerzburg240124.pdf
Strobel, A., Franke-Bartholdt, L., & Kersting, M. (2018). Eignungsinterviews/direkte mündliche Befragungen. In Personalauswahl kompetent gestalten: Grundlagen und Praxis der Eignungsdiag-nostik nach DIN 33430 (2018) (pp. 66–83). Springer.
Stroebe, W. (2020). Student evaluations of teaching encourage poor teaching and contribute to grade inflation: A theoretical and empirical analysis. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 42(4), 276–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2020.1756817
Tennant, J. P., & Ross-Hellauer, T. (2020). The limitations to our understanding of peer review. Research Integrity and Peer Review, 5, 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-020-00092-1
Vallbracht, C. (2024). Geldnot an Hochschulen führt zu Entfall an Stellen [Lack of funding leads to loss of jobs] [Published February 2]. https://www.forschung-und-lehre.de/politik/geldnot-an-hochschulen-fuehrt-zu-entfall-von-stellen-6259
Van den Hoven, M., Lindemann, T., Zollitsch, L., et al. (2023). A taxonomy for research integrity training: Design, conduct, and improvements in research integrity courses. Science and Engineering Ethics, 29, 14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00425-x
Van Iddekinge, C. H., Roth, P. L., Raymark, P. H., & Odle-Dusseau, H. N. (2012). The criterion-related validity of integrity tests: An updated meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(3), 499–530. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021196
Vazire, S., & Holcombe, A. O. (2021). Where are the self-correcting mechanisms in science? Review of General Psychology, 26(2), 212–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/10892680211033912
Vidak, M., Bara´c, L., Tokali´c, R., Buljan, I., & Marui´c, A. (2021). Interventions for organizational climate and culture in academia: A scoping review. Science and Engineering Ethics, 27, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00298-6
Weihs, C., Hernandez Rodriguez, T., Doeckel, M., Marty, C., & Wormer, H. (2018). Arbeitszeiten von Professorinnen und Professoren in Deutschland 2016. AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv, 12, 135–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11943-018-0227-y
Wiarda, J.-M. (2023). Das stille Leiden der Betroffenen [The victims’ silent suffering]. https://www.jmwiarda.de/2023/11/20/das-stille-leiden-der-betroffenen/
Winkler, M. (2023). Machtmissbrauch an Universitäten [Power abuse at universities]. https://zeitgeschichte-online.de/themen/professorinnen-gegen-machtmissbrauch-universitaeten
Wissenschaftsrat. (2023). Strukturen der Forschungs-finanzierung an deutschen Hochschulen. Wissenschaftsrat. https://doi.org/10.57674/pms3-pr05
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Nicole Boessel-Debbert, Annette Kluge, Daniel Leising, Dorothee Mischkowski, Le Vy Phan, Franz Richter, Manfred Schmitt, Jutta Stahl
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
