The Embassy of Good Science - User contributions [en]

Resource:Fa27f5f7-b2cd-43b3-83df-892fc20d948b

2021-08-19T15:36:51Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=The role of moral philosophy in the divide between science and non-science
|Is About=This is a factual case that examines the role of moral values in the distinction between science and non-science. The article details a recent (at the time of writing) case of scientific misconduct to show the differences in moral philosophy as applied to science and as applied to non-scientific practices. The publication further elaborates upon these differences and whether they might be used to distinguish between science and non-science.
<references />
|Important Because=Although there is much legislation and debate about science, its distinction from non-science is blurred. The article concludes that science is treated specially by moral philosophy, as cases of scientific misconduct are treated differently than cases of misbehaviour in other fields. Therefore, moral philosophy may play an interesting role in distinguishing non-science from science and may have consequences for the legislation on scientific research and the handling of cases of misconduct. Accordingly, it would be interesting to examine the exact role of moral philosophy in the distinction between science and non-science. Although definitively answering this question is beyond the scope of this article, asking this may be an important step towards a conclusion on this subject. 
<references />
|Important For=Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11017-007-9035-z
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:28a0859b-9e52-4af4-97f0-b0f8eeac1f1c;Theme:0d054575-ca21-4209-b7c5-6120fc0ed647
}}
{{Tags
|Has Timepoint=1993 - 2006
|Has Location=Norway
|Has Virtue And Value=Reliability; Honesty; Accountability
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Fabrication; REC approval
|Related To Research Area=Clinical medicine
}}

Resource:18a89181-ee50-4dee-82c3-f44c4a7454dc

2021-08-19T15:33:11Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=Researcher Accused of Breaching Research Ethics Faces GMC
|Is About=This factual case describes an instance in which a researcher is accused of scientific misconduct by the General Medical Council (GMC). The researcher allegedly lied to trial sponsors and other research institutions about having obtained ethical approval and about the existence of other sponsors. In addition, the accused researcher used the titles of professor and Ph.D. without obtaining a doctorate.
|Important Because=Ethical approval for scientific research is extremely important. Otherwise, the health of research participants may be harmed. Similarly, performing biomedical research without being properly trained to do so may have serious consequences for both the health of research participants as well as the quality of the research. Therefore, lying about such approval and one’s credentials are serious offences and should be punished severely.
|Important For=Researchers; research leaders; phd students
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.bmj.com/content/334/7605/1185
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:9ac8c1db-f98b-41ee-858d-a8c93a647108;Theme:92439f75-5c0c-49d4-a21f-e9b41bd3a7db
}}
{{Tags
|Has Timepoint=2001
|Has Location=United Kingdom; UK
|Has Virtue And Value=Respect; Accountability; Transparency; Honesty; Integrity
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=REC approval; Deception
|Related To Research Area=Clinical medicine
}}

Resource:15de5331-8dc3-4dba-8b81-5abcb412e698

2021-08-19T15:31:08Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=The Aftermath of Scientific Fraud
|Is About=This factual case discusses the consequences of various occasions of scientific misconduct, such as data fabrication. This report takes a different approach to most reports on scientific misconduct as it focuses on the consequences for collaborators and colleagues on a personal level, rather than the consequences for the perpetrator, the scientific community or science in general.
<references />
|Important Because=Although the detrimental consequences of scientific misconduct on a community-wide level are well known, the aftermath on a more personal level is only sparsely described. As this case shows, the careers of supervisors, co-workers and students may be seriously damaged by the deeds of the perpetrator. This could potentially affect the willingness of aspiring scientists to report scientific misconduct. In addition, the present case carefully sketches the problematic situation of potential whistle-blowers. On the one hand, graduate students, post-docs, and other lab personnel are obliged to inform the authorities of potential scientific misconduct by their principal investigator. On the other hand, blowing the whistle may cause them to lose their jobs. A better understanding of the factors influencing these decisions and the personal consequences of scientific misconduct may aid us in creating a scientific community that is safer for whistle-blowers and conducts more honest science. 
<references />
|Important For=Researchers; All stakeholders in research; Editors; Students; Journals
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(06)00249-2?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0092867406002492%3Fshowall%3Dtrue
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:5f65272f-6e95-4768-8236-bc821a97f3d8;Theme:047c3bec-1747-499b-b6d5-684cbfb81edd;Theme:02592695-e4f8-473c-a944-adfe0d8094c0;Theme:28a0859b-9e52-4af4-97f0-b0f8eeac1f1c
}}
{{Tags
|Has Timepoint=2000; 2005
|Has Location=USA; United States
|Has Virtue And Value=Reliability; Honesty
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Fabrication; Authorship; Honorary authorship
|Related To Research Area=Clinical medicine; Medical Biotechnology
}}

Resource:86081665-70a2-47b2-869e-d3ee84a92e9f

2021-08-19T15:28:11Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=Global Code of Conduct for Research in Resource-Poor Settings
|Is About=This code of conduct promotes ethical research in lower-income countries by advising on how to prevent so-called ‘ethics dumping’: the practice of performing unethical research in lower-income countries.
|Important Because=Research should be done ethically, regardless of the setting it takes place in. Research participants in lower-income countries may be more vulnerable to exploitation due to their social-economic situation. Initiatives such as this code of conduct aim to help achieve the same ethical standards in research in both higher and lower-income countries.

 
|Important For=Researchers; All stakeholders in research
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.globalcodeofconduct.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Global-Code-of-Conduct-Brochure.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:Edb02e27-f2e5-4b75-a78c-ec42e76011f6;Resource:5bbdd729-8f96-432a-a0ee-56510e343d01
|Related To Theme=Theme:8704dd29-f972-45ca-993c-3e93f834dbfb;Theme:72c8ab8d-bbf8-4503-8b48-9de7eac37673;Theme:307c6cc0-20d5-432f-bc4a-51aff0c985fe
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=TRUST
|Has Timepoint=2018
|Has Virtue And Value=Honesty; Respect
}}

Resource:38cabc43-2b53-4c98-80ea-89b97ef5107d

2021-08-19T15:23:11Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Education
|Title=COPE core practices
|Is About=The COPE core practices are guidelines for all stakeholders involved in academic publishing. They replaced COPE’s previous code of conduct and may be used in addition to national codes of conduct.
|Important Because=To prevent misconduct in academic publishing it is important to define the best practices and ethical standards. Therefore, these core practices dictate how to ethically handle potential cases of misconduct, as well as ways to minimize the chances that misconduct may occur in academic publishing.
|Important For=Early career researchers; All stakeholders in research
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
}}
{{Related To}}
{{Tags
|Involves=COPE
|Has Timepoint=2017
|Has Location=United Kingdom
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Publication ethics; Research misconduct; Authorship; Conflict of interest; Data management; Reproducability; Peer review; Intellectual property; Allegations of misconduct
}}

Resource:6db91721-501b-4ec2-aff7-a2c732c4806f

2021-08-19T15:19:58Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=Jesse's Intent
|Is About=This factual case describes the story of a teenage boy who died during a clinical trial in which a gene therapy for a rare metabolic disorder was tested. The story is told in great detail from the perspective of the boy's father. Following his son's death, he discovered that the researchers leading the trial had conflicts of interest and that he and his son were not properly informed of the risks of the trial.
|Important Because=Participants of clinical trials must be well informed of the risks they are taking by participating in the trial, especially when the treatment under investigation is a non-therapeutic intervention. In these cases, the benefits should outweigh the risks, which was not true in the tragedy described here: adverse effects were reported in previous cases, whilst no efficacy of the gene therapy was observed in humans. As noted in the article, the trial most likely progressed regardless of these risks due to the principal investigator's conflicts of interest and faults by the responsible regulatory institutions. Therefore, this case is a prime example of how conflicts of interest may seriously harm the health of patients and trial participants. To prevent unnecessary deaths in the future, it is important to keep these stories in our collective memory and learn lessons from them. The detailed account presented here may help us do just that.
|Important For=Researchers; Academic institutions; All stakeholders in research; Research Ethics Committees; Clinical researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12739533
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:88b73549-fec0-4fb9-99f6-fe1055d6b76a;Theme:0d054575-ca21-4209-b7c5-6120fc0ed647;Theme:6d71bd59-c3bc-4cd5-9c9f-1ab4e53fc320
}}
{{Tags
|Has Timepoint=1998 - 1999
|Has Location=USA; United States
|Has Virtue And Value=Respect; Autonomy; Accountability; Care; Honesty; Openness; Transparency; Objectivity
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Patient safety; Informed consent; Deception
|Related To Research Area=Clinical medicine
}}

Resource:63435d54-ed0e-4d06-abdc-75a91b5a7661

2021-08-19T15:16:12Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=History, Ethics and the Presidential Commission on Research in Guatemala
|Is About=This is a factual case about a medical study that took place in a Guatemalan prison. In this study, experiments into syphilis infection were performed on military personnel, prisoners, asylum inmates, and orphans, without their consent. Rather than giving a detailed description of events, like other reports on this subject have already done, the article reconstructs the research environment that allowed this unethical study to take place.
|Important Because=To prevent future research misconduct and unethical behaviour it is important to understand which factors make it possible for such practices to take place. In addition and as noted in the article, it is important to do justice not only to the victims of research misconduct but to all those involved, especially when the accused are deceased. When examining past cases of research misconduct it is important to keep in mind the ethical standards at the time the research was conducted, rather than applying our current ethical frameworks to the case. The analysis presented in this article contributes to our understanding of the various aspects of retrospective assessment of research misconduct cases.
|Important For=Researchers; Research Ethics Committees
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://academic.oup.com/phe/article-abstract/7/3/211/1483697?redirectedFrom=fulltext
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:9ac8c1db-f98b-41ee-858d-a8c93a647108;Theme:0d054575-ca21-4209-b7c5-6120fc0ed647
}}
{{Tags
|Has Timepoint=1946
|Has Location=Guatemala
|Has Virtue And Value=Respect; Autonomy; Dignity; Respect
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Patient safety; Equipoise; Informed consent; Vulnerable population; Balancing harms and benefits
|Related To Research Area=Clinical medicine
}}

Resource:4c1137a3-8b5e-411e-bc98-18ae6818d7b8

2021-08-19T15:06:26Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=A Review of the Impact of the TeGenero Trial on the Design, Conduct, and Ethics of FIM Trials
|Is About=This factual case details a so-called ‘First-in-man’ (FIM) clinical trial that seriously harmed the six participants who received the drug under investigation. The report discusses the consequences of the disastrous trial for later FIM trials. The article considers the scientific consequences, such as the procedure to determine the acceptable dose of the drug, and reviews the ethical dimensions of FIM trials, like potential monetary compensation for the risks the participants take.
<references />
|Important Because=The health of the participants should be the top priority in clinical trials, especially in FIM trials where drugs are tested that potentially pose a high risk to the health of the participants. The case discussed here shows that even when the trial is reviewed and approved by ethical boards, it can end disastrously for the trial participants. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance to review the errors made and learn lessons from tragic cases such as the one discussed here. The overview presented by the current article may help us to do so.
<references />
|Important For=Researchers; Research Ethics Committees
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/Abstract/2007/11000/First_in_Man__FIM__Clinical_Trials_Post_TeGenero_.20.aspx
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:0d054575-ca21-4209-b7c5-6120fc0ed647;Theme:E5629f68-81f6-490d-84d6-fd1e63b8dbc7;Theme:D44fd22a-ed5d-4120-a78b-8881747131fd
}}
{{Tags
|Has Timepoint=2006
|Has Location=England
|Has Virtue And Value=Respect; Integrity; Autonomy; Compassion; Dignity
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Patient safety; Informed consent; Experimental design; Clinical trials
|Related To Research Area=Clinical medicine
}}

Resource:F5e8362e-3dd6-4b95-a148-e0ccdb1cd4f3

2021-08-19T15:03:03Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=The Olivieri Debacle: Where Were the Heroes of Bioethics?
|Is About=This is a factual case about a blood researcher who is pressured by a pharmaceutical company into not sharing any details of a clinical trial which was terminated after the drug under investigation was suggested to be ineffective and maybe even harmful for the patients. The researcher received no support from the institution she was working for. The institution was later shown to have a conflict of interest. The article especially emphasizes the lack of action by the bioethical community in this case.
<references />
|Important Because=Publication of clinical trial results is important, especially if the drug under investigation is potentially harmful to the patients. If the pharmaceutical company tries to force the researcher to do otherwise, the institution should intervene and try to support its employee, even if this means that the institution receives no funding from the company. Similarly, the local bioethical community should offer support as well. The example at hand shows the potential consequences if this is not the case: the integrity of the research may be endangered, along with the health of both the patients and researchers. 
<references />
|Important For=Researchers; Research Ethics Committees; Universities; Academic staff; Academic institutions; Clinical researchers; Industry
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://jme.bmj.com/content/30/1/44
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:9ac8c1db-f98b-41ee-858d-a8c93a647108;Theme:6d71bd59-c3bc-4cd5-9c9f-1ab4e53fc320;Theme:Fe62e07c-2e75-4a55-82e6-1908fa543b7a;Theme:0d054575-ca21-4209-b7c5-6120fc0ed647
}}
{{Tags
|Has Timepoint=1995
|Has Location=Canada
|Has Virtue And Value=Respect; Honesty; Transparency; Compassion; Collegiality; Safety
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Informed consent; Conflict of interest; Patient safety
|Related To Research Area=Clinical Medicine
}}

Resource:3cadb4be-b312-4afa-a723-4e12c4a801f3

2021-08-19T14:59:35Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=Research Problems at Australian University Hit the News
|Is About=This factual case reports a failure to declare a conflict of interest by researchers of experimental interventions at a university. The researchers studied a disputed therapy that is endorsed by a controversial organization. According to the university and the publisher, the researchers failed to declare that they had affiliations with the organization. However, the authors stated in a press release on the situation that they did declare their conflicts of interest in all instances.
|Important Because=Conflicts of interest may lead to the introduction of biases in research studies. This is especially the case when the product or drugs under investigation are produced by a company, as this may lead to corruption. Recent research shows that more favourable results are obtained for company-sponsored than non-company-sponsored studies.<ref>Lundh A, Lexchin J, Mintzes B, Schroll JB, Bero L. Industry sponsorship and research outcome: systematic review with meta-analysis. Intensive Care Med. 2018 Oct;44(10):1603-1612. doi: 10.1007/s00134-018-5293-7. Epub 2018 Aug 21. PMID: 30132025.</ref> Therefore, it is important for researchers to declare all potential conflicts of interest. Undeclared conflicts of interests, such as in the present case, may cast considerable doubt on the objectivity of the researchers.
<references />
|Important For=Researchers; Universities; Journal editors; Journals; Journal publishers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://retractionwatch.com/2018/04/19/research-problems-at-australian-university-hit-the-news/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:4d29ae67-bee8-4203-b78f-320bc63025d0;Theme:6d71bd59-c3bc-4cd5-9c9f-1ab4e53fc320
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=Retraction Watch
|Has Timepoint=19-4-2018
|Has Location=Australia
|Has Virtue And Value=Transparency; Reproducibility; Accountability
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Conflict of interest; Data management; Retraction
|Related To Research Area=LS 07 - Diagnostic Tools, Therapies and Public Health; LS 05 - Neurosciences and Neural Disorders
}}

Resource:E1827d9c-7be0-42ca-bf86-ef5003366ebd

2021-08-19T14:52:54Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=Court Denies Appeal of HIV Fraudster’s 57-month Prison Sentence
|Is About=This factual case details a court's decision to uphold the prison sentence for a former researcher who was found guilty of scientific misconduct. The misconduct entailed the modification of HIV trial outcomes to make a drug look more effective. The attorney of the defendant appealed the decision, but the court decided to uphold the sentence.
|Important Because=Scientific misconduct in drug trials, especially the modification of research outcomes, severely endangers the health of future patients who will be treated with the drug. In addition, it leads to the waste of research funds and diminishes public trust in science. Therefore, offences such as these must be punished.
|Important For=Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://retractionwatch.com/2016/01/13/court-denies-appeal-of-hiv-fraudsters-57-month-prison-sentence/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:D61666e2-58df-470f-bfb6-9f8ac2eea64f
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=Retraction Watch
|Has Timepoint=13-1-2016
|Has Location=USA; United States
|Has Virtue And Value=Honesty; Transparency; Accountability
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Fabrication; Faked Data
|Related To Research Area=Biological sciences
}}

Resource:E3a1be4e-2ff9-4b7f-b44c-abd409fe225a

2021-08-19T12:48:09Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title='I am really sorry': Peer Reviewer Stole Text for Own Paper
|Is About=This factual case describes an instance of plagiarism by a peer reviewer. The peer reviewer had sent the unpublished manuscript to a colleague with whom he was writing a review. Portions of text from the manuscript under review ended up in the published review written by the peer reviewer and his colleague. The review was retracted, and the peer reviewer apologized.
|Important Because=Peer reviewing is essential to maintaining the integrity of academic literature. Importantly, authors who submit a manuscript for peer review should be able to trust that their manuscripts will not be used for any purpose other than the peer review itself, unless they have given explicit permission for this.
|Important For=Researchers; Peer reviewers; Reviewers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://retractionwatch.com/2016/03/14/i-am-really-sorry-peer-reviewer-stole-text-for-own-paper/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:02592695-e4f8-473c-a944-adfe0d8094c0;Theme:29d64b53-eba2-489b-937d-440d6cd118d8
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=Retraction Watch
|Has Timepoint=14-3-2016
|Has Location=Taiwan
|Has Virtue And Value=Reliability; Transparency; Honesty
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Plagiarism; Peer review ethics violation; Journal Retractions
|Related To Research Area=Chemical sciences
}}

Resource:88fb9129-4338-4bd3-a332-2e5eee03c598

2021-08-19T12:41:39Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=What Universities can Learn from one of Science’s Biggest Frauds
|Is About=This factual case discusses an analysis of research misconduct investigations into a particular and significant case of scientific misconduct. The investigators reviewed several misconduct reports regarding this instance and found that all reports were inadequate.
<references />
|Important Because=Well-performed investigations are essential to prevent research misconduct and its negative consequences. As noted in the article, current misconduct investigations mostly focus on the question of whether any scientific misconduct has occurred, rather than the correctness of the literature that has followed from it. However, the negative consequences for patients and general practitioners are mostly caused by the publications that follow from the research. This literature can be incorrect, even if no real misconduct has been established, leading to potential harm for patients. Therefore, the researchers in the present case argue that research misconduct investigations should aim to preserve the integrity of the literature, rather than to establish whether misconduct has taken place or not.
|Important For=Researchers; Academic staff; Universities; research integrity researchers; Research Ethics Committees
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01884-2
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:02592695-e4f8-473c-a944-adfe0d8094c0;Theme:4d29ae67-bee8-4203-b78f-320bc63025d0;Theme:28a0859b-9e52-4af4-97f0-b0f8eeac1f1c
}}
{{Tags
|Has Timepoint=2016
|Has Location=Japan; United States
|Has Virtue And Value=Reliability; Accountability; Honesty
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Plagiarism; Retraction; Fabrication
|Related To Research Area=Health sciences
}}

Resource:Ea84de30-5f0c-4fc8-a57f-e61b53d03544

2021-08-19T12:37:52Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=The Art and Politics of Covert Research: Doing ‘Situated Ethics’ in the Field
|Is About=This factual case describes a covert sociological study on the work culture of nightlife bouncers. The author describes both practical and ethical problems he encountered during his research which resulted from its covert nature. However, he argues that the research would not have been possible without its secrecy.
<references />
|Important Because=The practice of covert research in sociology has been a long subject of debate. It has received much criticism due to the deception of research subjects, among other objections.<ref>Homan, R. (1980) ‘The Ethics of Covert Methods’, British Journal of Sociology 31 (1): 36–59.</ref><ref>Homan, R. (1991) The Ethics of Social Research. London: Macmillan.</ref> Nonetheless, covert research methods may also have beneficial effects, as outlined in the present case. This may be especially true in the fields of sociology and social sciences, where it is important not to disturb the behavioral and cultural patterns under study. It is important to take both the beneficial effects and ethical objections into consideration when determining the justifiability of covert research practice. The present case may aid in the identification of beneficial consequences, while it may also help to prepare sociologists for the problems they may encounter during a covert study. 
<references />
|Important For=Researchers; Research Ethics Committees; Sociologists
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://studysites.sagepub.com/dqr4/study/Student%20resources/Chapter%2010/Calvey.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:Ba84b1f8-06f6-4582-95f9-ec033265ba22
|Related To Theme=Theme:9ac8c1db-f98b-41ee-858d-a8c93a647108;Theme:0d054575-ca21-4209-b7c5-6120fc0ed647;Theme:D44fd22a-ed5d-4120-a78b-8881747131fd
}}
{{Tags
|Has Timepoint=1996
|Has Location=United Kingdom; UK
|Has Virtue And Value=Respect; Autonomy; Transparency; Honesty
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Consent; Risk; Covert Research; Deception
|Related To Research Area=Sociology
}}

Resource:Ea84de30-5f0c-4fc8-a57f-e61b53d03544

2021-08-19T12:35:46Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=The Art and Politics of Covert Research: Doing ‘Situated Ethics’ in the Field
|Is About=This factual case describes a covert sociological study on the work culture of nightlife bouncers. The author describes both practical and ethical problems he encountered during his research which resulted from its covert nature. However, he argues that the research would not have been possible without its secrecy.
<references />
|Important Because=The practice of covert research in sociology has been a long subject of debate. It has received much criticism due to the deception of the research subjects among other objections.<ref>Homan, R. (1980) ‘The Ethics of Covert Methods’, British Journal of Sociology 31 (1): 36–59.</ref><ref>Homan, R. (1991) The Ethics of Social Research. London: Macmillan.</ref> Nonetheless, covert research methods may also have beneficial effects, as outlined in the present case. This may especially be true in the field of sociology and social sciences, where it is important to not disturb the behavioral and cultural patterns. It is important to not only take both these beneficial effects and the ethical objections into consideration when determining the justifiability of covert research practice. The present case may aid in the identification of these beneficial consequences, while it may also help to prepare sociologists for the problems they may encounter during a covert study. 
<references />
|Important For=Researchers; Research Ethics Committees; Sociologists
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://studysites.sagepub.com/dqr4/study/Student%20resources/Chapter%2010/Calvey.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:Ba84b1f8-06f6-4582-95f9-ec033265ba22
|Related To Theme=Theme:9ac8c1db-f98b-41ee-858d-a8c93a647108;Theme:0d054575-ca21-4209-b7c5-6120fc0ed647;Theme:D44fd22a-ed5d-4120-a78b-8881747131fd
}}
{{Tags
|Has Timepoint=1996
|Has Location=United Kingdom; UK
|Has Virtue And Value=Respect; Autonomy; Transparency; Honesty
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Consent; Risk; Covert Research; Deception
|Related To Research Area=Sociology
}}

Resource:8a2719e6-7498-40c5-96a8-be0e10a81e27

2021-08-19T12:33:49Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=Canaries in the Mines: Children, Risk, Non-Therapeutic Research, and Justice
|Is About=This is a factual case discussing the Kennedy Krieger lead paint study, where a United States Court of Appeals condemned what it called a “non-therapeutic research programme” using children. The court ruled that a parent cannot consent to the participation of a child in “non-therapeutic” research in the state of Maryland . The case involves issues that had been given little attention by the courts, such as children’s participation in research, proxy consent, and the duties of medical researchers towards their participants. The analysis includes a discussion of the relevance of the “therapeutic” versus “non-therapeutic” importance and value of a study, as well as cost-benefit analysis, the design of research, and study aims.
|Important Because=The analysis provides a strategy to help identify when something is amiss with a research proposal and prompts a much closer examination of such issues.
|Important For=Researchers; PI
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://jme.bmj.com/content/30/2/176
}}
{{Related To}}
{{Tags
|Has Timepoint=1990
|Has Location=United States
|Has Virtue And Value=Respect
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Fairness; Safety
|Related To Research Area=Health Sciences
}}

Resource:9736d9b3-fbe1-45cf-a5d0-20e19038d394

2021-08-19T12:26:42Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Cases
|Title=Guest Authorship, Mortality Reporting, and Integrity in Rofecoxib Studies
|Is About=This factual case discusses various accusations of scientific misconduct, most notably the practices of guest authorship and ghostwriting. The case begins with various letters to the authors of an article on guest authorship and the editors of the journal, following which both the editors and the authors respond to these letters.
<references />
|Important Because=Ghostwriting and guest authorship give an unfair advantage to guest authors over researchers who do not take part in such practices by awarding guest authors with publications despite not having contributed to the work done. In addition, the practice of guest authorship may seriously damage public trust in science and may also cast considerable doubt on the independence of researchers involved in drug trials. However, incorrect accusations of guest authorship, and scientific misconduct in general, harm the reputation of innocent researchers. Therefore, it is important to openly discuss accusations of guest authorship made in publications, as is done in the present case. 
<references />
|Important For=Researchers; Journal editors; Journal publishers; Pharma Industry
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/182444
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:Cbe88760-7f0e-4d6d-952b-b724bb0f375e;Theme:540f8241-c354-4249-8b63-6bdc2e74bdf8;Theme:83f33f33-e9ba-4589-b450-92e3992a22db
}}
{{Tags
|Has Timepoint=2008
|Has Location=USA; United States
|Has Virtue And Value=Honesty; Reliability; Transparency
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Authorship; Ghost authorship; Questionable research practice
|Related To Research Area=Clinical medicine
}}

Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39

2020-10-28T16:51:04Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Theme
|Theme Type=Good Practices
|Has Parent Theme=Theme:B2331451-5a6a-4aa2-a3d5-c68d2c96c8e1
|Title=Discipline specific codes and guidelines on research integrity
|Is About=Some codes of conduct and guidelines discuss foundational principles which are relevant for researchers across all areas of research, and practices which are applicable in all disciplines. But there are other codes and guidelines which concern specific disciplines or areas of research.
|Important Because=Some research areas have domain-specific challenges or considerations when it comes to research integrity. These differences can be due to methodological, conceptual, historical or other differences between disciplines, and can also reflect priority issues that stem from the kind of research that is performed within a particular discipline. That is why it can be important to have more specific codes and guidelines that explicitly address these topics and put them into context.

In particular, research areas in which practitioners have a dual role and also offer services to clients - such as sociologists, psychologists, or statisticians - often have well-established domain-specific codes of conduct. It is also common for disciplines in which researchers collaborate with industry or media respresentatives, deal with sensitive data, or involve human and animal subjects in research, to provide more detailed guidance on these topics over and above that mentioned in domain-general codes and guidelines.
|Important For=PhD students; Supervisors; Junior researchers; Early career researchers; Senior researchers
|Has Reference=a
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Resource=Resource:Ad7f9f5c-a519-4744-a7c6-5fba091e9264;Resource:Fd6e5aee-0aca-4fc2-854a-5fed52f2641a;Resource:1e1d90cf-ca7e-45d6-b9ba-c5e4791f6e8a
|Related To Theme=Theme:2446855b-0acc-4e28-817e-a65d7e00162e
}}
{{Tags
|Has Virtue And Value=Transparency
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Academic Responsibility of University
}}

Resource:5bbdd729-8f96-432a-a0ee-56510e343d01

2020-10-27T20:12:54Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity
|Is About=The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity serves the European research community as a framework for self-regulation across all scientific and scholarly disciplines and for all research settings. The Code was published originally in English on 24 March 2017 and was translated to all official EU languages by the European Commission’s Translational Services and with the support of ALLEA Member Academies.
|Important Because=The 2017 revised edition of the Code addresses emerging challenges emanating from technological developments, open science, citizen science and social media, among other areas. The European Commission recognises the Code as the reference document for research integrity for all EU-funded research projects and as a model for organisations and researchers across Europe.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://allea.org/code-of-conduct/
}}
{{Related To}}
{{Tags
|Involves=ALLEA Member Academies
|Has Timepoint=2017
|Has Location=Europe
|Has Virtue And Value=Honesty; Reliability; Respect; Accountability; Quality
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities; PE - Physical Sciences and Engineering; LS - Life Sciences
}}

Resource:76bfaee3-9b41-4bee-9893-e509008be617

2020-10-27T20:11:01Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Federation of Psychologists' Associations (EFPA) Model-Code of Ethics
|Is About=The European Federation of Pychologists' Associations represents 38 psychologists' associations in Europe, with a total of over 300,000 members, and promotes the development, dissemination and application of psychology in all its forms, and aims to contribute to shaping a humane society, in Europe and beyond, on the basis of psychology’s expertise.
|Important Because=This model code of conduct reflects the shared understanding of the values of the EFPA's member organizations, and seeks to provide principles and guidelines by which individual psychologists and organizations can inform the practice of psychology and enhance professional competence.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=http://ethics.efpa.eu/metaand-model-code/model-code/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Federation of Psychologists' Associations
|Has Timepoint=2015
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities
}}

Resource:D2931677-8120-4523-bdd7-6b02dc2c5705

2020-10-27T20:10:35Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Federation of Psychologists' Associations (EFPA) Meta-Code of Ethics
|Is About=The European Federation of Pychologists' Associations represents 38 psychologists' associations in Europe, with a total of over 300,000 members, and promotes the development, dissemination and application of psychology in all its forms, and aims to contribute to shaping a humane society, in Europe and beyond, on the basis of psychology’s expertise.
|Important Because=This meta code of conduct provides guidance for the content of the ethical codes of the EFPA's member associations, and details the ethical principles that member associations should adhere to.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=http://ethics.efpa.eu/metaand-model-code/meta-code/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Federation of Psychologists' Associations
|Has Timepoint=2005
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities
}}

Resource:A6c8ca06-bb3b-4e8e-884c-9122dc090f27

2020-10-27T20:09:15Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Mathematical Society (EMS) Code of Practice
|Is About=The European Mathematical Society represents more than 3,000 mathematicians in Europe and promotes the development of all aspects of mathematics, in particular mathematical research, relations of mathematics to society, relations to European institutions, and mathematical education.
|Important Because=This code of conduct outlines the reposnsibilities of mathematicians, as well as all who are concerned with the publication, dissemination, and assessment of mathematical research in Europe.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://euro-math-soc.eu/sites/default/files/COP.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Mathematical Society
|Has Timepoint=2012
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=PE 01 - Mathematics; PE - Physical Sciences and Engineering
}}

Resource:Dbf6a50a-40bf-4d6b-8931-bb5b821c1d97

2020-10-27T20:08:21Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research (ESOMAR) International Code on Market, Opinion and Social Research and Data Analytics
|Is About=The European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research promotes the value of market, opinion and social research and data analytics, as well as providing ethical and professional guidance on these issues.
|Important Because=Their code of conduct, which is co-owned by the International Chamber of Commerce, champions good research and the adherence to profesional standards.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.esomar.org/uploads/public/knowledge-and-standards/codes-and-guidelines/ICCESOMAR-International-Code_English.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research
|Has Timepoint=2016
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=SH 01.04 - Marketing; SH - Social Sciences and Humanities
}}

Resource:3c452685-6899-470a-9460-b0204f2008e3

2020-10-27T20:07:20Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=Federation of European Toxicologists and European Societies of Toxicology (Eurotox) Code of Ethics
|Is About=The Federation of European Toxicologists and European Societies of Toxicology (Eurotox) unites more than 6,000 members from across Europe, and aims to foster the science and education of toxicology, influence regulatory and policy frameworks to promote the safety of humans, animals and the environment, and protect global health.
|Important Because=Via their code of conduct, Eurotox provides guidelines for the professional conduct of its members.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=http://www.eurotox.com/membership/code-of-ethics/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=Federation of European Toxicologists and European Societies of Toxicology (Eurotox)
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=LS 07.05 - Toxicology; LS - Life Sciences
}}

Resource:5e4d6ed2-3710-429f-83eb-7da7a9b4d6e9

2020-10-27T20:06:32Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) Code of Conduct
|Is About=The European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association aims to advance medical science by promoting fundamental and clinical advances in the field of nephrology, dialysis, renal transplantation, hypertension, and related subjects.
|Important Because=This code of conduct details the ethical expectations that apply to all members of the association.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.era-edta.org/en/about-era-edta/organization-governance/code-of-conduct/
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=LS - Life Sciences
}}

Resource:B0e5c922-6867-4439-ba5d-e2a71ff3405b

2020-10-27T20:05:24Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=Federation of European Pharmacological Societies (EPHAR) Ethical Code of Conduct
|Is About=The Federation of European Pharmacolgical Societies aims to advance research and education in pharmacology and related sciences, and to promote co-operation between national and regional pharmacological societies in Europe.
|Important Because=This code of conduct lays out general principles that those pariticipating in EPHAR activities must abide by.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.ephar.org/docs/EPHAR_Ethical_Code_of_Conduct.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=Federation of European Pharmacological Societies
|Has Timepoint=2013
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=LS 07.03 - Pharmacology, pharmacogenomics, drug discovery and design, drug therapy; LS - Life Sciences
}}

Resource:Ab5ba50a-312e-45b9-82ae-7b82d3bab082

2020-10-27T20:03:58Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Nuclear Society (ENS) Ethical Charter
|Is About=The European Nuclear Society aims to promote and to contribute to the advancement of science and engineering in the field of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy by all suitable means.
|Important Because=This code of conduct details the core ethical standards that apply to professionals from industry, the academic world, research centres and authorities in the field of nuclear science.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=http://ens.cs-flow.be/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Download-Ethical-Charter.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Nuclear Society
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=PE 02.03 - Nuclear physics; PE - Physical Sciences and Engineering
}}

Resource:A0fc01ae-1a29-4743-845d-5b97d23d473b

2020-10-27T20:03:01Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Meteorological Society (EMS) Code of Practice for communicating knowledge on climate change to the public
|Is About=The European Meteorological Society, consisting of 38 member societies and 31 associate members, aims to advance the science, profession and application of meteorology, and of sciences related to it, at the Europe-wide level, for the benefit of the whole population.
|Important Because=Via their code of conduct, the EMS provides guidelines for individuals of the meteorological community in Europe on how to communicate honestly and reliably with the general public, including the media, on issues of meteorology and in particular on complex or controversial issues such as climate change.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://emetsoc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/EMS_Code-of-Practice.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Meteorological Society
|Has Timepoint=2011
|Has Location=Europe
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Public Communication
|Related To Research Area=PE - Physical Sciences and Engineering; PE 10.02 - Meteorology, atmospheric physics and dynamics
}}

Resource:221330a2-ea60-45ca-ad43-e6fbcd02227b

2020-10-27T20:01:45Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Geosciences Union (EGU) Code of Conduct
|Is About=The European Geosciences Union is dedicated to the pursuit of excellence in Earth, planetary and space science.
|Important Because=This code of conduct aims to promote ethical integrity and an inclusive, constructive and positive approach to science by outlining the expected and required behaviour of members and participants of EGU activities.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://cdn.egu.eu/static/a9d6500/about/code_of_conduct.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Geosciences Union
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=PE - Physical Sciences and Engineering; PE 10.13 - Physical geography
}}

Resource:1a21f62a-1e8e-419d-a34b-9575a0406ac7

2020-10-27T19:59:55Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) Code of Conduct
|Is About=The European Consortium for Political Research aims to advance the study of political science, international relations, and related disciplines by supporting individual researchers in developing their careers.
|Important Because=This code of conduct explicitly defines appropriate conduct for members and affiliates of the ECPR.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://ecpr.eu/contentpage.aspx?id=626
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Consortium for Political Research
|Has Timepoint=2020
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities
}}

Resource:69bce19c-166e-49df-ae00-bffd9b0788cf

2020-10-27T19:58:14Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ECNP) Code of Conduct
|Is About=The European College of Neuropsychopharmacology is a learned society committed to ensuring that advances in the understanding of brain function and human behaviour are translated into better treatments and enhanced public health.
|Important Because=Adopted in 2012, this code of conduct outline general principles of scientific research and clinical practice for those who participate in the activities of the ECNP.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.ecnp.eu/about-ecnp/Governance/Code-of-Conduct
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European College of Neuropsychopharmacology
|Has Timepoint=2012
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=LS - Life Sciences; LS 05 - Neurosciences and Neural Disorders
}}

Resource:67627bd1-3b87-4104-a617-a847084f3193

2020-10-27T19:56:28Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Cystic Fibrosis Society (ECFS) Patient Registry Code of Conduct
|Is About=The European Cystic Fibrosis Society is an international community of scientific and clinical professionals committed to improving survival and quality of life for people with cystic fibrosis by promoting high quality research, education and care.
|Important Because=The ECFS Patient Registry collects demographic and clinical data from consenting people with cystic fibrosis in Europe. The information is used to deepen our understanding of cystic fibrosis, improve standards of care, and to facilitate public health planning. This code of conduct details the ways in which the registry should be used.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.ecfs.eu/sites/default/files/general-content-files/working-groups/ecfs-patient-registry/ECFSPR_CodeofConduct_1.1.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Cystic Fibrosis Society
|Has Timepoint=2014
|Has Location=Europe
|Has Virtue And Value=Confidentiality; Privacy
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Data Management; Conflicts of Interest
|Related To Research Area=LS - Life Sciences
}}

Resource:4d455eb9-a243-4504-8819-088044bd0db0

2020-10-27T19:53:40Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) Code of Practice for Fieldwork Training
|Is About=The European Association of Archaeologists is a learned society for professional archaeologists in Europe and beyond, with a total of more than 15,000 members.
|Important Because=This code of conduct outlines standards of conduct for fieldwork training for archaeologists in Europe.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.e-a-a.org/EAA/About/EAA_Codes/EAA/Navigation_About/EAA_Codes.aspx?hkey=714e8747-495c-4298-ad5d-4c60c2bcbda9#fieldwork
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Association of Archaeologists
|Has Location=Europe
|Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Training
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities; SH 06.01 - Archaeology, archaeometry, landscape archaeology
}}

Resource:A360b053-30dd-49ac-b0b6-adab021b860a

2020-10-27T19:52:52Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Association of Social Psychology (EASP) Code of Conduct
|Is About=The European Association of Social Psychology aims to promote excellence in and improve the quality of social psychological research in Europe.
|Important Because=Via their code of conduct, the EASP outlines the policies that apply to those participating in EASP activities, particularly with regards to professionalism and non-discrimination.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.easp.eu/events/coc/?
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Association of Social Psychology
|Has Location=Europe
|Has Virtue And Value=Professionalism; Non-discrimination
|Related To Research Area=SH 04.05 - Social and clinical psychology; SH - Social Sciences and Humanities
}}

Resource:C6fb13b6-a9a9-4a3c-82b9-707eb46b1f59

2020-10-27T19:50:40Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Code of Ethics
|Is About=The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology is an association of more than 11,000 clinicians, researchers and allied health professionals from over 50 national societies dedicated to improving the health of people affected by allergic diseases.
|Important Because=This code of conduct lays out the ways in which those affiliated with the EAACI should behave in order to support the broader goals of the society.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.eaaci.org/images/committee_ethics/New-EAACI-Code-of-Ethics-and-annexes.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=LS 06 - Immunity and Infection; LS - Life Sciences
}}

Resource:4d455eb9-a243-4504-8819-088044bd0db0

2020-10-27T19:49:52Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) Code of Practice for Fieldwork Training
|Is About=The European Association of Archaeologists is a learned society for professional archaeologists in Europe and beyond, with a total of more than 15,000 members.
|Important Because=This code of conduct outlines standards of conduct for fieldwork training for archaeologists in Europe.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.e-a-a.org/EAA/About/EAA_Codes/EAA/Navigation_About/EAA_Codes.aspx?hkey=714e8747-495c-4298-ad5d-4c60c2bcbda9#fieldwork
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Association of Archaeologists
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities; SH 06.01 - Archaeology, archaeometry, landscape archaeology
}}

Resource:Aa7e975e-c7ce-4c94-9610-6264719056c8

2020-10-27T19:49:18Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) Code of Practice
|Is About=The European Association of Archaeologists is a learned society for professional archaeologists in Europe and beyond, with a total of more than 15,000 members.
|Important Because=This code of conduct outlines standards of conduct for members of the EAA to follow in fulfilling their responsibilities, both to the community and to their professional colleagues.
|Important For=Researchers; All stakeholders in research
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.e-a-a.org/EAA/About/EAA_Codes/EAA/Navigation_About/EAA_Codes.aspx?hkey=714e8747-495c-4298-ad5d-4c60c2bcbda9#practice
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Association of Archaeologists
|Has Timepoint=2009
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities; SH 06.01 - Archaeology, archaeometry, landscape archaeology
}}

Resource:0255be9e-1c01-43bb-ae08-c086ae2a3a9c

2020-10-27T19:48:47Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) Principles of Conduct for Archaeologists involved in Contract Archaeological Work
|Is About=The European Association of Archaeologists is a learned society for professional archaeologists in Europe and beyond, with a total of more than 15,000 members.
|Important Because=This code of conduct outlines standards of conduct for archaeologists involved in contract work in Europe.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.e-a-a.org/EAA/About/EAA_Codes/EAA/Navigation_About/EAA_Codes.aspx?hkey=714e8747-495c-4298-ad5d-4c60c2bcbda9#contract
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Association of Archaeologists
|Has Timepoint=1998
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities; SH 06.01 - Archaeology, archaeometry, landscape archaeology
}}

Resource:4389dbc1-c4d7-4e89-86d0-f85539141eaa

2020-10-27T19:47:51Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Astronomical Society (EAS) Ethics Statement and Guidelines for Good Practice
|Is About=The European Astronomical Society, founded in 1990, aims to promote and advance astronomy in Europe.
|Important Because=This code of conduct lays out ethical standards for the behaviour of those affiliated with the EAS, and astronomers in Europe more generally.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://eas.unige.ch//documents/EAS_Ethics_Statement.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Astronomical Society
|Has Timepoint=2018
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=PE - Physical Sciences and Engineering
}}

Resource:0255be9e-1c01-43bb-ae08-c086ae2a3a9c

2020-10-27T19:46:15Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) Principles of Conduct for Archaeologists involved in Contract Archaeological Work
|Is About=The European Association of Archaeologists is a learned society for professional archaeologists in Europe and beyond, with a total of more than 15,000 members.
|Important Because=This code of conduct outlines standards of conduct for archaeologists involved in contract work in Europe.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.e-a-a.org/EAA/About/EAA_Codes/EAA/Navigation_About/EAA_Codes.aspx?hkey=714e8747-495c-4298-ad5d-4c60c2bcbda9#contract
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA)
|Has Timepoint=1998
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities; SH 06.01 - Archaeology, archaeometry, landscape archaeology
}}

Resource:4d455eb9-a243-4504-8819-088044bd0db0

2020-10-27T19:45:50Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) Code of Practice for Fieldwork Training
|Is About=The European Association of Archaeologists is a learned society for professional archaeologists in Europe and beyond, with a total of more than 15,000 members.
|Important Because=This code of conduct outlines standards of conduct for fieldwork training for archaeologists in Europe.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.e-a-a.org/EAA/About/EAA_Codes/EAA/Navigation_About/EAA_Codes.aspx?hkey=714e8747-495c-4298-ad5d-4c60c2bcbda9#fieldwork
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA)
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities; SH 06.01 - Archaeology, archaeometry, landscape archaeology
}}

Resource:Aa7e975e-c7ce-4c94-9610-6264719056c8

2020-10-27T19:45:17Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) Code of Practice
|Is About=The European Association of Archaeologists is a learned society for professional archaeologists in Europe and beyond, with a total of more than 15,000 members.
|Important Because=This code of conduct outlines standards of conduct for members of the EAA to follow in fulfilling their responsibilities, both to the community and to their professional colleagues.
|Important For=Researchers; All stakeholders in research
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.e-a-a.org/EAA/About/EAA_Codes/EAA/Navigation_About/EAA_Codes.aspx?hkey=714e8747-495c-4298-ad5d-4c60c2bcbda9#practice
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA)
|Has Timepoint=2009
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities; SH 06.01 - Archaeology, archaeometry, landscape archaeology
}}

Resource:C6fb13b6-a9a9-4a3c-82b9-707eb46b1f59

2020-10-27T19:44:12Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Code of Ethics
|Is About=The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology is an association of more than 11,000 clinicians, researchers and allied health professionals from over 50 national societies dedicated to improving the health of people affected by allergic diseases.
|Important Because=This code of conduct lays out the ways in which those affiliated with the EAACI should behave in order to support the broader goals of the society.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.eaaci.org/images/committee_ethics/New-EAACI-Code-of-Ethics-and-annexes.pdf
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI)
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=LS 06 - Immunity and Infection; LS - Life Sciences
}}

Resource:0255be9e-1c01-43bb-ae08-c086ae2a3a9c

2020-10-27T19:42:23Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) Principles of Conduct for Archaeologists involved in Contract Archaeological Work
|Is About=The European Association of Archaeologists is a learned society for professional archaeologists in Europe and beyond, with a total of more than 15,000 members.
|Important Because=This code of conduct outlines standards of conduct for archaeologists involved in contract work in Europe.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.e-a-a.org/EAA/About/EAA_Codes/EAA/Navigation_About/EAA_Codes.aspx?hkey=714e8747-495c-4298-ad5d-4c60c2bcbda9#contract
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA)
|Has Timepoint=1998
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities
}}

Resource:4d455eb9-a243-4504-8819-088044bd0db0

2020-10-27T19:41:12Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) Code of Practice for Fieldwork Training
|Is About=The European Association of Archaeologists is a learned society for professional archaeologists in Europe and beyond, with a total of more than 15,000 members.
|Important Because=This code of conduct outlines standards of conduct for fieldwork training for archaeologists in Europe.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.e-a-a.org/EAA/About/EAA_Codes/EAA/Navigation_About/EAA_Codes.aspx?hkey=714e8747-495c-4298-ad5d-4c60c2bcbda9#fieldwork
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA)
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities
}}

Resource:Aa7e975e-c7ce-4c94-9610-6264719056c8

2020-10-27T19:39:50Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) Code of Practice
|Is About=The European Association of Archaeologists is a learned society for professional archaeologists in Europe and beyond, with a total of more than 15,000 members.
|Important Because=This code of conduct outlines standards of conduct for members of the EAA to follow in fulfilling their responsibilities, both to the community and to their professional colleagues.
|Important For=Researchers; All stakeholders in research
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.e-a-a.org/EAA/About/EAA_Codes/EAA/Navigation_About/EAA_Codes.aspx?hkey=714e8747-495c-4298-ad5d-4c60c2bcbda9#practice
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Association of Archaeologists (EAA)
|Has Timepoint=2009
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=SH - Social Sciences and Humanities
}}

Resource:743aa175-0df8-4d6e-820c-3f7e22ca3f2a

2020-10-27T19:38:07Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=Biomedical Alliance in Europe (Biomed Alliance) Code of Conduct
|Is About= The Biomedical Alliance in Europe (BioMed Alliance) is a group of 34 European medical societies, with a total of more than 400,000 members, created in 2010 to unite researchers and healthcare professionals and address common issues at the European level.
|Important Because=Via their code of conduct, BioMed Alliance aims to promote the best interests and values of their members, promote excellence in healthcare, research and innovation, and improve the well-being of all European citizens. 
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://www.biomedeurope.org/about/code-of-conduct.html
}}
{{Related To
|Related To Theme=Theme:65e6f304-51e2-4e41-93d3-e48518248b39
}}
{{Tags
|Involves=Biomedical Alliance in Europe (Biomed Alliance)
|Has Timepoint=2020
|Has Location=Europe
|Related To Research Area=LS - Life Sciences
}}

Resource:76bfaee3-9b41-4bee-9893-e509008be617

2020-10-22T15:41:02Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Federation of Psychologists' Associations (EFPA) Model-Code of Ethics
|Is About=The European Federation of Pychologists' Associations represents 38 psychologists' associations in Europe, with a total of over 300,000 members, and promotes the development, dissemination and application of psychology in all its forms, and aims to contribute to shaping a humane society, in Europe and beyond, on the basis of psychology’s expertise.
|Important Because=This model code of conduct reflects the shared understanding of the values of the EFPA's member organizations, and seeks to provide principles and guidelines by which individual psychologists and organizations can inform the practice of psychology and enhance professional competence.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=http://ethics.efpa.eu/metaand-model-code/model-code/
}}
{{Related To}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Federation of Psychologists' Associations
|Has Timepoint=2015
|Has Location=Europe
}}

Resource:D2931677-8120-4523-bdd7-6b02dc2c5705

2020-10-22T15:39:29Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Federation of Psychologists' Associations (EFPA) Meta-Code of Ethics
|Is About=The European Federation of Pychologists' Associations represents 38 psychologists' associations in Europe, with a total of over 300,000 members, and promotes the development, dissemination and application of psychology in all its forms, and aims to contribute to shaping a humane society, in Europe and beyond, on the basis of psychology’s expertise.
|Important Because=This meta code of conduct provides guidance for the content of the ethical codes of the EFPA's member associations, and details the ethical principles that member associations should adhere to.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=http://ethics.efpa.eu/metaand-model-code/meta-code/
}}
{{Related To}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Federation of Psychologists' Associations
|Has Timepoint=2005
|Has Location=Europe
}}

Resource:A6c8ca06-bb3b-4e8e-884c-9122dc090f27

2020-10-22T15:38:24Z

0000-0002-3240-4478:

{{Resource
|Resource Type=Guidelines
|Title=European Mathematical Society (EMS) Code of Practice
|Is About=The European Mathematical Society represents more than 3,000 mathematicians in Europe and promotes the development of all aspects of mathematics, in particular mathematical research, relations of mathematics to society, relations to European institutions, and mathematical education.
|Important Because=This code of conduct outlines the reposnsibilities of mathematicians, as well as all who are concerned with the publication, dissemination, and assessment of mathematical research in Europe.
|Important For=All stakeholders in research; Researchers
}}
{{Link
|Has Link=https://euro-math-soc.eu/sites/default/files/COP.pdf
}}
{{Related To}}
{{Tags
|Involves=European Mathematical Society
|Has Timepoint=2012
|Has Location=Europe
}}