The motivations for research misconduct (RM) among Ghanaian academics are likely multifaceted but poorly studied. In this pilot exploratory descriptive case study, we thematically explored institutional policies and conducted thirty (30) in-depth interviews of purposively selected Ghanaian academics in a public university in Ghana by examining their views on RM causes, enablers, inhibitors and preventive strategies. We found diverse views about RM among the academics interviewed. For instance, the majority of academics perceived RM in Ghanaian universities as a common practice, fueled by the 'publish-or-perish' phenomenon whilst a few thought RM may not always be intentional. Two important views of RM were also observed: (a) regulatory definitions of fabrication, falsification, manipulation and plagiarism (FFMP) and (b) professional definitions of not meeting scientific standards but not falling into FFMP. We also observed that the common practice of RM among Ghanaian academics may slow scientific progress, dent institutional reputation, harm researchers and participants. The university's policies provided guidelines on conducting research responsibly but no explicit references were made to what constitutes RM and its related consequences. Our study thus highlights the need for increased awareness and education on ethical research conduct in the university and recommend a policy decision from the University management to publicize research integrity and build the Institutional capacity to prevent and manage research misconduct and the damaging effects on the reputation of academics and the university that can follow. A nationwide study is also recommended for broader empirical evidence for policy impact.
Gbagbo et al. (Sat,) studied this question.