Skip to main content
SAGE
Search form
PDF
  • 00:00

    [MUSIC PLAYING]

  • 00:18

    KRISHMA LABIB: My name is Krishma Labib.And I'm a Third-year PhD Student at the Amsterdam UniversityMedical Center, Department of Ethics, Law Humanities.

  • 00:26

    JOERI TIJDINK: My name is Joeri Tijdink.I'm an Assistant Professor at Amsterdam UMC, Departmentof Ethics, Law Humanities.And besides my work as a Researcher,I'm also a Psychiatrist.What we found is we develop new guidelines

  • 00:50

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: for research integrity.And research integrity refers to doing research wellaccording to high ethical professional methodologicalstandards.In recent years, there's an increasing acknowledgmentthat research integrity is not onlythe responsibility of researchers,but also other research stakeholders,such as research-performing and research-funding organizations.

  • 01:10

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: And to foster research integrity successfully,it is thought that research institutions should developappropriate policies, infrastructures, and systemsto address various aspects of research.However, to date, there are little concrete guidanceavailable to research-performing and research-fundingorganizations on how to foster research integrity.

  • 01:32

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: And this is important, because if institutions do not know howto use and implement research integrity guidance,they cannot foster the responsible research practicesin their institution.

  • 01:47

    KRISHMA LABIB: In our co-creation study,we aim to co-create research integrity guidelinesfor underdeveloped research integrity topicstogether with research-performing andresearch-funding organizations stakeholders.Think about research administrators,funders, and also researchers, and other players.

  • 02:14

    JOERI TIJDINK: To come back to this first and importantquestion, why this video?So what is co-creation?Co-creation is an emerging qualitative research methodoriginating in the field of marketing and designtechnology.And while there are different approaches to co-creation,we use co-creation as approach from the design thinking

  • 02:35

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: perspective.And design refers to solving real-world problemsthrough a user-centered approach by creating infrastructures,product services, or experiences.And co-creation is simply designing togetherwith end users using creative approaches consistingof visual stimuli.

  • 03:04

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: Then again, the question is why co-creation methods?So as compared to other methods of developingpolicy guidance, such as informal and formal consensusmethods, co-creation offers some important benefits.So first of all-- and this is not necessarily in importance--co-creation is engaging, fun, and produces rich ideas.

  • 03:26

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: And through the use of an open approach wherea diversity of stakeholders take a key role in developingas many ideas as possible that arerelevant for this specific topic,you can allow for the inclusion of stakeholders' divergingviews.

  • 03:47

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: And this is different than other methodswhere the focus is on reaching consensus,in which divergent views might be missedand might be confused to actually create guidance.There is also a limitation of course, to co-creation.Because co-creation is suitable for developing and refiningof bigger ideas.

  • 04:07

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: And it's really evoking new ideas in stakeholders.But it's not so suited for debating specific formulationsof a procedure or item.So therefore, guidelines will notbe finalized, if you end a co-creation study,and then you need some additional steps

  • 04:28

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: to have the formulations of the guidanceand the recommendations more precise and formatted.

  • 04:33

    KRISHMA LABIB: There are some key features of co-creationthat make it very useful for producing research integrityguidelines.First of all, by asking users to not only talk about thingsin co-creation like you would in standard qualitative research,but to also make things and do things,co-creation promotes out-of-the-box thinking.

  • 04:55

    KRISHMA LABIB [continued]: And this is really crucial for creating innovative solutions.Secondly, by asking participants to make thingsand then exploring the rationale behind this,it's possible to tap into stakeholders' latentvalues, which they might not be consciouslyaware of themselves.So this really helps to understand your end users

  • 05:15

    KRISHMA LABIB [continued]: better.Finally, and perhaps most obviously,when you do co-creation, you treat your stakeholdersas equal partners in the initial stages of the developmentrather than only at the implementation phase.And this helps to take into account their needsand wants and increases the likelihoodthat the guidelines will be implementable.

  • 05:45

    JOERI TIJDINK: So what we did in our study to create guidancefor research integrity, we used a purposive recruitmentstrategy to identify people with topic-specific knowledge,such as knowledge on research integrity,education policy for this specific topic.And they all were working at research-performing orresearch-funding organizations or other types

  • 06:06

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: of research organizations that had to do with research.For example, national bodies or national governmentalstructures.And we use their network and existingdatabases of our rights experts to invite them.In total, we included 75 participants

  • 06:26

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: representing 23 different countriesfrom various parts of Europe and also from North America.Our participants included research administrators,funders, policymakers, researchers, and even editors,and consultants.

  • 06:41

    KRISHMA LABIB: In our co-creation study,we conducted the following procedure for each topicthat we wanted to develop guidelines for.So first, our topic, we looked at existing literatureand existing recommendations.And we transformed these into a set of inspirations,which were images or short pieces of text representing

  • 07:04

    KRISHMA LABIB [continued]: the recommendation.And we sent these to the participants of our first twoco-creation workshops.In the first two co-creation workshops,we focused on creating content.And the inspirations helped to evoke ideasamong our participants.After conducting these content creation workshops,we analyzed the data.

  • 07:26

    KRISHMA LABIB [continued]: And based on this analysis, we created a first draftof our guidelines.We sent this first draft to the participants of our contentrefinement guidelines, which weretwo workshops focusing on improvingthe guidelines further.And after these two workshops, we analyzed the data,and then we had the final version of our guidelines.

  • 07:50

    KRISHMA LABIB [continued]: So we did this for six topics, meaning that we conducted24 workshops in total.

  • 07:57

    JOERI TIJDINK: And then we had this specific limitation,the extra limitation, because normally co-creation youdo together in a room, and you do it live.But we conducted our study during the COVID pandemic.And therefore, we had to conduct all the co-creation workshopsonline.And to be honest, there are several advantagesto organize these workshops online,

  • 08:20

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: when you use a collaborative virtual whiteboard software,so you can visualize and prepare the workshop plansin one virtual space.And although, you may miss the informal talks or chatswhile you're drinking coffee or having lunch together,you can still collaborate togetherand interact in real time on this whiteboard.

  • 08:40

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: And the extra advantage, of course,is that you can invite people from all over the world.And you can conduct several co-creation worksmore efficiently.So inviting people from the US is not a big burden anymorebecause you can do it online or from other parts of Europe.And therefore, you can include much more different stakeholder

  • 09:01

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: perspective.Regarding the method, we used Zoom to interact.And we used a virtual online whiteboard softwarecalled Miro to conduct each three-hour workshop.The images of this slide, what you see here,provide a brief glimpse of what the workshop exerciseslook like and in the first and second set of workshops.

  • 09:31

    KRISHMA LABIB: So we analyzed the data resultingfrom the workshops using thematic analysis, whichis about clustering data into related themes.And we use an analysis on the wall approachwhere we analyze the data directly on the mirror boards.The data from the workshop consisted

  • 09:52

    KRISHMA LABIB [continued]: of both the direct outputs of the workshop,namely the sticky note that the participants themselvescreated, but also the transcripts from the workshops.Since in the first two workshops,we were interested in creating new ideas,we used inductive thematic analysis thereto analyze the data.

  • 10:13

    KRISHMA LABIB [continued]: In inductive thematic analysis, the themes that you useare driven by the data directly rather thanbeing predefined by external sources.In the third and fourth workshop, on the other hand,we used mostly deductive thematic analysis.In deductive thematic analysis, the themes

  • 10:34

    KRISHMA LABIB [continued]: are predefined based on external sources.In this case, we use the same themesthat came up in the first two workshopsto analyze the data from the third and fourth workshops.

  • 10:54

    JOERI TIJDINK: What was the results then?So our workshop resulted in the creation of 11 separate RIguidelines on research-performingorganizations.We produced four guidelines on RI educationand training and research environments each, as wellthree guidelines on responsible supervision and mentoring.

  • 11:14

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: And for the research-funding organizations,we created a total of 10 separate research integrityguidelines.We produced three guidelines for selection and evaluationof proposals and monitoring each, as well asfour guidelines on independence.So just to give you an example of how this looks like,

  • 11:35

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: this is a very rough sketch, but oneof the guidelines for predoctorate research integrityeducation and training for research-performinginstitutions you can see here.And it consists of 10 different recommendations.And each of these has a number of subpoints associated with,which are not shown here but are relevant to further outline

  • 11:58

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: what the actual recommendation entails.

  • 12:09

    KRISHMA LABIB: The co-creation workhas delivered rich information, whichhas allowed us to create a lot of contentfor our research integrity guidelines.And these guidelines at the moment are comprehensive.Some of the guidelines are further developed than othersaccording to our participants.However, we're not there yet.Finalizing a guideline requires further steps

  • 12:31

    KRISHMA LABIB [continued]: to fine tune and test.But based on our co-creation workshop,we have the inspiration and the content already.The further work that is needed involvesmaking the guidelines practical, implementable, and really finetuning the precise terminology and phrasing that we will use,and formatting the guidelines further.

  • 12:53

    KRISHMA LABIB [continued]: We might also need to develop an implementation manualfor organizations that are intendingto use our guidelines to help them see how they can implementour guidelines.

  • 13:11

    JOERI TIJDINK: We hope that we really have evoked enthusiasmwithin you to also use the co-creation methodologyfor creating guidance or combining different stakeholderperspectives.And our conclusion is that it is a great method, of course,that it's fun and engaging for stakeholders,that it really creates out-of-the-box ideas.

  • 13:34

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: But also it just produces a rich output.It allows for inclusion of divergent viewpointsfrom all over the world, while you conduct it online.And while you focus on the needs of end users or the endstakeholders, it helps to provideoutputs that are practical and implementable.However, co-creation by itself is not

  • 13:57

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: sufficient to finalize guidelines.So furthermore, some small, fine-grained stepsare needed to make the guidelines implementableand find the right formats to actually use it.Despite these limitations, we believethat co-creation is an excellent methodto use for creating helpful guidance that

  • 14:20

    JOERI TIJDINK [continued]: take into account diverse view of stakeholdersfrom all over the world.Thank you for watching this video.[MUSIC PLAYING]

Abstract

Joeri Tijdink, PhD, Assistant Professor, and Krishma Labib, PhD Student, Amsterdam University Medical Center, discuss using co-creation methods to develop research integrity guidelines, including the aim of the co-creation study, how co-creation works, data collection, key findings, and next steps.

People

Academic:
Joeri Tijdink
Academic:
Krishma Labib

Segment Info

Title:

Segment Num: 1

Keywords:

Segment Start Time:

Segment End Time:

People

Things Discussed

Organizations Discussed:

Events Discussed:

Places Discussed:

Persons Discussed:

Resources

    References
    References

    Further Reading

    Labib, K., Pizzolato, D., Taraj, B., & Et al., (2020).SOPs4RIco-creation workshops. Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/8upmb/

Methods Map

Research ethics

The field of moral philosophy dealing with the standards by which behaviour should be regulated within research.
Research ethics
Using Co-Creation Methods to Develop Research Integrity Guidelines

Joeri Tijdink, PhD, Assistant Professor, and Krishma Labib, PhD Student, Amsterdam University Medical Center, discuss using co-creation methods to develop research integrity guidelines, including the aim of the co-creation study, how co-creation works, data collection, key findings, and next steps.

Copy and paste the following HTML into your website