(RCR) CITI RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT OF RESEARCH BASIC
QUESTIONS LATEST UPDATED VERSION COMPLETE
ACTUAL QUESTIONS AND CORRECT DETAILED
ANSWERS (CORRECT VERIFIED ANSWERS) |ALREADY
GRADED A+
The main reason that the Royal Society of London developed the modern form of
peer review was to:
-Streamline the publication of conference proceedings.
-Award grant funding.
-Decide on promotions for researchers.
-Control the quality of published papers. - ANSWER: Control the quality of published
papers.
Which of the following statements most accurately describes the review process for
grant proposals?
-Once one federal agency has approved a grant proposal, the other agencies do not
need to review it.
-The peer review process is the same across all federal agencies.
-Funding agencies usually have committees, often with external reviewers, that
assess the quality of the proposal.
-Applicants who submit grant proposals are informed in advance as to who will
review their proposals. - ANSWER: Funding agencies usually have committees, often
with external reviewers, that assess the quality of the proposal.
The two main criteria that the National Science Foundation (NSF) uses to evaluate
grant proposals are:
-Ethical integrity and legal compliance.
-Sustainability and innovation.
-Intellectual merit and broader impact.
-Quality and quantity. - ANSWER: -Intellectual merit and broader impact.
Which of the following is true regarding the traditional peer review process:
-Under double-blind review, the identity of the reviewer is revealed to the author.
-Under double-blind review, the identity of the author is revealed to the reviewer.
-Under single-blind review, the identity of the author is revealed to the reviewer.
-Under single-blind review, the identity of the reviewer is revealed to the author. -
ANSWER: -Under single-blind review, the identity of the author is revealed to the
reviewer.
Reviewers have a responsibility to promote ethical peer review by:
-Using the information contained in a reviewed manuscript to further their own
research.
-Revealing their identity to the authors of the manuscript or grant proposal.
-Preserving the confidentiality of the submission.
,-Seeking the help of others in the research team to perform the review. - ANSWER: -
Preserving the confidentiality of the submission.
Which of the following is the most appropriate step to take if authors believe that
their manuscript was reviewed unfairly?
-The author can contact the editor with their concerns.
-The author should ask the editor to reveal the identities of the reviewers.
-The author should contact the reviewers directly.
-Nothing; by submitting to the peer review process, authors agree to accept the
outcome. - ANSWER: -The author can contact the editor with their concerns.
A reviewer's main responsibility is to:
-Contact the authors when the review is completed.
-Be friendly.
-Behave professionally.
-Avoid criticizing the work of other researchers. - ANSWER: -Behave professionally.
The main reason that grant proposal reviewers with a conflict of interest should
remove themselves from the review process is because:
-Having a conflict of interest means an individual does not have the relevant
expertise to perform the review.
-The author of the proposal may learn about the situation.
-Their removal lessens the chance that bias will affect the review process.
-Having a conflict of interest means an individual does not have the time to perform
the review. - ANSWER: -Their removal lessens the chance that bias will affect the
review process.
Which of the following statements is true regarding the responsibilities of reviewers?
-Reviewers should identify the positive and negative aspects of a manuscript, and
indicate where improvements are needed.
-Reviewers are not supposed to turn down opportunities to review manuscripts even
if they lack the relevant expertise.
-Reviewers should be an advocate for the author and to help convince the editor to
publish the manuscript.
-Reviewers can make use of the information in a manuscript before it is published,
giving them an advantage over competitors. - ANSWER: Reviewers should identify
the positive and negative aspects of a manuscript, and indicate where improvements
are needed.
Proper paraphrasing of a sentence written by someone else may be accomplished
by:
-Changing a sentence's subject and predicate around.
-Removing the first word and the last word and inserting two or three words
elsewhere.
-Changing present tense to past tense or changing from active to passive voice.
, -Using your own words and writing voice to express the idea conveyed in the
sentence. - ANSWER: -Using your own words and writing voice to express the idea
conveyed in the sentence.
Ethical writing and scholarship is based on an implicit contract between the author
and readers, whereby readers assume that what they read is accurate, has been
written by the author, and has:
-Not been disseminated before unless noted otherwise.
-Undergone double-blind peer review.
-Followed traditional methods.
-Been based on the collective efforts of other researchers. - ANSWER: -Not been
disseminated before unless noted otherwise.
Paraphrasing another author's paragraph by substituting one or two words in each
sentence and then adding one citation to the author at the end of the paragraph:
-May constitute plagiarism because the original material has not been sufficiently
modified to constitute a proper paraphrase.
-Is acceptable because changing a word here or there and adding a citation is
sufficient to always qualify as an appropriate paraphrase.
-Is acceptable because the voice of the author who is paraphrasing is likely to
emerge even when only a few words from the original are changed.
-May constitute plagiarism because the paraphrased paragraph must be enclosed in
quotation marks. - ANSWER: -May constitute plagiarism because the original
material has not been sufficiently modified to constitute a proper paraphrase.
An idea is most likely to represent "common knowledge" if:
-The idea has been around for more than a decade.
-It can be safely assumed that the readers and the author are both thoroughly
familiar with the idea and its source.
-It can be readily obtained in an encyclopedia.
-The idea has already appeared in a published work. - ANSWER: -It can be safely
assumed that the readers and the author are both thoroughly familiar with the idea
and its source.
The reuse of one's previously published material in a new journal article is most
appropriate if:
-The author informs all the relevant parties and obtains permission to do so.
-The same author wrote the first paper more than a decade ago.
-Each of the publications belongs to a different organization.
-The same words are being reused but not the same data. - ANSWER: -The author
informs all the relevant parties and obtains permission to do so.
Authors who reuse portions of text that have appeared in one of their earlier
published papers run the risk of being accused of:
-Falsification
-Plagiarism
-Self-plagiarism
QUESTIONS LATEST UPDATED VERSION COMPLETE
ACTUAL QUESTIONS AND CORRECT DETAILED
ANSWERS (CORRECT VERIFIED ANSWERS) |ALREADY
GRADED A+
The main reason that the Royal Society of London developed the modern form of
peer review was to:
-Streamline the publication of conference proceedings.
-Award grant funding.
-Decide on promotions for researchers.
-Control the quality of published papers. - ANSWER: Control the quality of published
papers.
Which of the following statements most accurately describes the review process for
grant proposals?
-Once one federal agency has approved a grant proposal, the other agencies do not
need to review it.
-The peer review process is the same across all federal agencies.
-Funding agencies usually have committees, often with external reviewers, that
assess the quality of the proposal.
-Applicants who submit grant proposals are informed in advance as to who will
review their proposals. - ANSWER: Funding agencies usually have committees, often
with external reviewers, that assess the quality of the proposal.
The two main criteria that the National Science Foundation (NSF) uses to evaluate
grant proposals are:
-Ethical integrity and legal compliance.
-Sustainability and innovation.
-Intellectual merit and broader impact.
-Quality and quantity. - ANSWER: -Intellectual merit and broader impact.
Which of the following is true regarding the traditional peer review process:
-Under double-blind review, the identity of the reviewer is revealed to the author.
-Under double-blind review, the identity of the author is revealed to the reviewer.
-Under single-blind review, the identity of the author is revealed to the reviewer.
-Under single-blind review, the identity of the reviewer is revealed to the author. -
ANSWER: -Under single-blind review, the identity of the author is revealed to the
reviewer.
Reviewers have a responsibility to promote ethical peer review by:
-Using the information contained in a reviewed manuscript to further their own
research.
-Revealing their identity to the authors of the manuscript or grant proposal.
-Preserving the confidentiality of the submission.
,-Seeking the help of others in the research team to perform the review. - ANSWER: -
Preserving the confidentiality of the submission.
Which of the following is the most appropriate step to take if authors believe that
their manuscript was reviewed unfairly?
-The author can contact the editor with their concerns.
-The author should ask the editor to reveal the identities of the reviewers.
-The author should contact the reviewers directly.
-Nothing; by submitting to the peer review process, authors agree to accept the
outcome. - ANSWER: -The author can contact the editor with their concerns.
A reviewer's main responsibility is to:
-Contact the authors when the review is completed.
-Be friendly.
-Behave professionally.
-Avoid criticizing the work of other researchers. - ANSWER: -Behave professionally.
The main reason that grant proposal reviewers with a conflict of interest should
remove themselves from the review process is because:
-Having a conflict of interest means an individual does not have the relevant
expertise to perform the review.
-The author of the proposal may learn about the situation.
-Their removal lessens the chance that bias will affect the review process.
-Having a conflict of interest means an individual does not have the time to perform
the review. - ANSWER: -Their removal lessens the chance that bias will affect the
review process.
Which of the following statements is true regarding the responsibilities of reviewers?
-Reviewers should identify the positive and negative aspects of a manuscript, and
indicate where improvements are needed.
-Reviewers are not supposed to turn down opportunities to review manuscripts even
if they lack the relevant expertise.
-Reviewers should be an advocate for the author and to help convince the editor to
publish the manuscript.
-Reviewers can make use of the information in a manuscript before it is published,
giving them an advantage over competitors. - ANSWER: Reviewers should identify
the positive and negative aspects of a manuscript, and indicate where improvements
are needed.
Proper paraphrasing of a sentence written by someone else may be accomplished
by:
-Changing a sentence's subject and predicate around.
-Removing the first word and the last word and inserting two or three words
elsewhere.
-Changing present tense to past tense or changing from active to passive voice.
, -Using your own words and writing voice to express the idea conveyed in the
sentence. - ANSWER: -Using your own words and writing voice to express the idea
conveyed in the sentence.
Ethical writing and scholarship is based on an implicit contract between the author
and readers, whereby readers assume that what they read is accurate, has been
written by the author, and has:
-Not been disseminated before unless noted otherwise.
-Undergone double-blind peer review.
-Followed traditional methods.
-Been based on the collective efforts of other researchers. - ANSWER: -Not been
disseminated before unless noted otherwise.
Paraphrasing another author's paragraph by substituting one or two words in each
sentence and then adding one citation to the author at the end of the paragraph:
-May constitute plagiarism because the original material has not been sufficiently
modified to constitute a proper paraphrase.
-Is acceptable because changing a word here or there and adding a citation is
sufficient to always qualify as an appropriate paraphrase.
-Is acceptable because the voice of the author who is paraphrasing is likely to
emerge even when only a few words from the original are changed.
-May constitute plagiarism because the paraphrased paragraph must be enclosed in
quotation marks. - ANSWER: -May constitute plagiarism because the original
material has not been sufficiently modified to constitute a proper paraphrase.
An idea is most likely to represent "common knowledge" if:
-The idea has been around for more than a decade.
-It can be safely assumed that the readers and the author are both thoroughly
familiar with the idea and its source.
-It can be readily obtained in an encyclopedia.
-The idea has already appeared in a published work. - ANSWER: -It can be safely
assumed that the readers and the author are both thoroughly familiar with the idea
and its source.
The reuse of one's previously published material in a new journal article is most
appropriate if:
-The author informs all the relevant parties and obtains permission to do so.
-The same author wrote the first paper more than a decade ago.
-Each of the publications belongs to a different organization.
-The same words are being reused but not the same data. - ANSWER: -The author
informs all the relevant parties and obtains permission to do so.
Authors who reuse portions of text that have appeared in one of their earlier
published papers run the risk of being accused of:
-Falsification
-Plagiarism
-Self-plagiarism
