Authors Disclosing Their Theistic Orientation in Journal Articles on Religion and Health? Infrequent, Informal, and Mostly Inconsistent with Conflict of Interest
An international survey was conducted of authors (N = 288) in the religion-health (R-H) research field concerning the disclosure of their theistic orientation (T-O) (i.e., whether they believe in God[s], a Higher Power, or a universal spirit) in their journal articles. Most (74%) of the respondents...
| Publié dans: | Journal of religion and health |
|---|---|
| Auteur principal: | |
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Springer Science + Business Media B. V.
[2020]
|
| Dans: |
Journal of religion and health
|
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Theistic beliefs
B conflict of interest B Competing interest |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (Verlag) |
| Résumé: | An international survey was conducted of authors (N = 288) in the religion-health (R-H) research field concerning the disclosure of their theistic orientation (T-O) (i.e., whether they believe in God[s], a Higher Power, or a universal spirit) in their journal articles. Most (74%) of the respondents said they never disclose their T-O in this context; e.g., because they feel the information is private (20%), irrelevant (36%), unimportant (56%), and/or likely to make them appear less credible (36%). Atheists were four times less likely than deists and gnostic theists were to disclose their T-O; authors who conducted experimental research and published more frequently were also less likely to disclose their T-O. When disclosure did occur, it was more likely to take place informally within the narrative of manuscripts. Most (66%) of the respondents did not view their T-O as a competing interest (CI). Agnostic theism and the absence of theistic belief were less likely to be experienced as CIs than gnostic theism, deism, and atheism were. The respondents predominantly disagreed both that T-O should be characterized as a CI (48%) and that authors in the R-H field should disclose their T-O as such (59%). Only 18% of the authors in this study who did perceive their T-O as a CI reported that they formally disclose that information to journals or publishers, while the majority (59%) of those authors said they never disclose the information in this context at all. The discussion focuses on reasons as to why authors might choose not to do so. Recommendations are offered for the R-H field. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1573-6571 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Journal of religion and health
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/s10943-020-00982-0 |