Journal of Student Research 2015

274 Journal Student Research with their own definition in the context of the university as an ARI (Blumer et al., 2014a). Increasing Attention to Ethics Although attention to ethics has been variable over time, it is en couraging that over the lifespan on the journal, particularly in the last several issues, there is an encouraging trend as such attention appears to growing. For example, in the second volume of the journal in 2003 only 20% (n = 2) of the 10 articles attended to ethics, and by the relative midpoint, or the sev enth volume in 2008, over half, 57.14% (n = 8), of the 14 articles attended to ethics. In the twelfth, or what was the most recent volume of the journal in this analysis, from 2013, 38.5% (n = 5) of the 13 total articles attended to ethics. In analyzing the patterns around attention to ethics more closely, the team noted that the attention has held relatively consistent since 2007, with each of the volumes not dipping below 1/3 of the articles attending to ethics per volume since this year (6 of 13 or 46.15% in 2009, 7 of 16 or 43.75% in 2010, 12 of 19 or 63.15% in 2011, 5 of 13 or 38.5% in 2012). In considering this pattern in the context of the larger university setting, it may be the case that the students and faculty advisors engaging in research have paid greater attention to ethics as the university has done so, particularly since the incep tion of the Center for Applied Ethics in 2008 (UW-Stout Center for Applied Ethics, n.d.). One way to support the trend around the increasing attention to ethics may be for the JSR to require, and provide examples of the way such attention can be included in submissions. For instance, at present the journal does include in its minimum requirements that submissions be “free of plagia rism and original in wording” (UW-Stout JSR, n.d.). Such an explicit focus on research integrity is reflective of findings from the mixed-data survey study of the larger university community in which participants were able to clearly articulate a qualitative understanding of the definition of research integrity (Blumer, Buchanan, & Klucarich, 2014b). Authors are also encouraged to continue the trend of being explicit in their scholarly work, particularly with regard to attending to ethics. One nominal way authors can do this is by noting obtainment of IRB approval in their writing. Limitations and Future Directions One of the common limitations associated with conducting a con tent analysis of scholarly journals is that the researchers often do not have access to rejected manuscripts submitted for publication, and because of this, it is difficult to determine the degree of bias in the submission and accep tance process (Blumer et al., 2012; Blumer et al., 2014). This was also the