TABLE 3.

Student responses to the question “What do you think Ariel and Jordan Should do next? Explain your reasoning,” in the context of research misconduct

Themes and codes	Number and percentage of cases coded n = 136
Major Theme 1: Actions—Comments on what Ariel and Jordan should do next.
Communicate with Instructor/Institution	87 (64.0%)
Sample Response: “They should tell their professor that the data they submitted was not genuine.”
Withdraw Sample	15 (11.0%)
Sample Response: “...get their samples terminated from the database.”
Acknowledge Issue (No Teacher, In General)	38 (27.9%)
Sample Response: “Ariel and Jordan should be honest about their mistakes.”
Major Theme 2: Recognizing Ethical Issues
Addresses Issue as QRP	27 (19.9%)
Sample Response: “...say their data are incorrect.”
Addresses Issue as Ethical Issue	34 (25.0%)
Sample Response: “... ethical duty to come clean.”
Addresses Issue as Misconduct	27 (19.9%)
Sample Response: “They falsified their results.”
Addresses Issue as Mistake/Blameless	37 (27.2%)
Sample Response: “Due to mistakes made during the research.”
Major Theme 3: Identifying Consequences—Identifying possible consequences of Ariel and Jordan’s actions.
Potential Consequences to Science	65 (47.8%)
Sample Response: “...could have implications on how researchers continue to do their research.”
Scale of Effect	19 (14.0%)
Sample Response: “The importance of these results has been amplified from the previous example.”