Institutional capacity to prevent and manage research misconduct: perspectives from Kenyan research regulators

Abstract

BackgroundResearch misconduct i.e. fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism is associated with individual, institutional, national, and global factors. Researchers' perceptions of weak or non-existent institutional guidelines on the prevention and management of research misconduct can encourage these practices. Few countries in Africa have clear guidance on research misconduct. In Kenya, the capacity to prevent or manage research misconduct in academic and research institutions has not been documented. The objective of this study was to explore the perceptions of Kenyan research regulators on the occurrence of and institutional capacity to prevent or manage research misconduct.MethodsInterviews with open-ended questions were conducted with 27 research regulators (chairs and secretaries of ethics committees, research directors of academic and research institutions, and national regulatory bodies). Among other questions, participants were asked: (1) How common is research misconduct in your view? (2) Does your institution have the capacity to preventresearch misconduct? (3) Does your institution have the capacity to manageresearch misconduct? Their responses were audiotaped, transcribed, and coded using NVivo software. Deductive coding covered predefined themes including perceptions on occurrence, prevention detection, investigation, and management of research misconduct. Results are presented with illustrative quotes.ResultsRespondents perceived research misconduct to be very common among students developing thesis reports. Their responses suggested there was no dedicated capacity to prevent or manage research misconduct at the institutional and national levels. There were no specific national guidelines on research misconduct. At the institutional level, the only capacity/efforts mentioned were directed at reducing, detecting, and managing student plagiarism. There was no direct mention of the capacity to manage fabrication and falsification or misconduct by faculty researchers.We recommend the development of Kenya code of conduct or research integrity guidelines that would cover misconduct.

Author(s)

Edwin Were, Jepchirchir Kiplagat, Eunice Kaguiri, Rose Ayikukwei, Violet Naayu

Year

2023

Countries

Kenya

Language

English

Research Method

Qualitative

Article Type

Peer-Reviewed Articles

Keywords

Education policy | Disciplinary policies | Leadership and management | Higher education | Excel Import

Full Citation Style

Were, E., Kiplagat, J., Kaguiri, E., Ayikukwei, R., & Naayu, V. (2023). Institutional capacity to prevent and manage research misconduct: perspectives from Kenyan research regulators. Strategic Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-023-00132-6
Were, E., Kiplagat, J., Kaguiri, E., Ayikukwei, R. and Naayu, V., 2023. Institutional capacity to prevent and manage research misconduct: perspectives from Kenyan research regulators. Strategic Research Journal. Available at: <https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-023-00132-6>
Were, E., Jepchirchir Kiplagat, Eunice Kaguiri, Rose Ayikukwei, and Violet Naayu. "Institutional capacity to prevent and manage research misconduct: perspectives from Kenyan research regulators." Strategic Research Journal (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-023-00132-6
Were E, Kiplagat J, Kaguiri E, Ayikukwei R, Naayu V. Institutional capacity to prevent and manage research misconduct: perspectives from Kenyan research regulators. Strategic Research Journal. 2023; https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-023-00132-6

Research Team

Edwin Were

Edwin Were

Jepchirchir Kiplagat

Jepchirchir Kiplagat

Eunice Kaguiri

Eunice Kaguiri

Rose Ayikukwei

Rose Ayikukwei

Violet Naayu

Violet Naayu

© 2026 AERD Database System. All Rights Reserved. Developed by Strategic Technologies.