Difference between revisions of "Resource:11ec8d68-7372-4dc9-936c-43f263aacdc2"
From The Embassy of Good Science
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
The cases discussed relate to issues of: | The cases discussed relate to issues of: | ||
| − | * authorship, plagiarism, ghostwriting; | + | *authorship, plagiarism, ghostwriting; |
| − | * citation of withdrawn publications, | + | *citation of withdrawn publications, |
| − | * anullment of academic titles; | + | *anullment of academic titles; |
| − | * ethics approvals; | + | *ethics approvals; |
| − | * data analysis, data ownership, data protection and inaccurate presentation of data; | + | *data analysis, data ownership, data protection and inaccurate presentation of data; |
| − | * right of use of visual materials; | + | *right of use of visual materials; |
| − | * approval processes for doctoral theses; | + | *approval processes for doctoral theses; |
| − | * wage-dumping. | + | *wage-dumping. |
|Important Because=By making its annual report publicly available, the Commission demonstrates the transparency of its reporting processes and its commitment to accountability in matters involving public inquiries, complaints and investigations. Moreover, it provides the public the opportunity to see the ways in which the Commission responds to queries and manages its investigations. | |Important Because=By making its annual report publicly available, the Commission demonstrates the transparency of its reporting processes and its commitment to accountability in matters involving public inquiries, complaints and investigations. Moreover, it provides the public the opportunity to see the ways in which the Commission responds to queries and manages its investigations. | ||
|Important For=Researchers; Research Integrity Officers; Research Ethics Committees; Research institutions; Policy makers; General public | |Important For=Researchers; Research Integrity Officers; Research Ethics Committees; Research institutions; Policy makers; General public | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Related To | {{Related To | ||
| + | |Related To Resource=Resource:75ad6b19-1614-4874-b789-b6fce1481b64 | ||
|Related To Theme=Theme:1386bef0-81e2-4c3b-bb65-673d2baead1c;Theme:0953795c-fb38-4080-a56f-fe503c4875bd;Theme:9ac8c1db-f98b-41ee-858d-a8c93a647108;Theme:Cc85bbe7-b8ac-40ef-81a7-8e34b153233c;Theme:8f6d4690-d1b2-4b9a-ac68-84e41fdb6c74 | |Related To Theme=Theme:1386bef0-81e2-4c3b-bb65-673d2baead1c;Theme:0953795c-fb38-4080-a56f-fe503c4875bd;Theme:9ac8c1db-f98b-41ee-858d-a8c93a647108;Theme:Cc85bbe7-b8ac-40ef-81a7-8e34b153233c;Theme:8f6d4690-d1b2-4b9a-ac68-84e41fdb6c74 | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 15:01, 27 August 2020
ResourcesCases
Good Practice and Reporting Cases in Austria
What is this about?
This is the 2017 annual report for the Austrian Commission for Research Integrity. In it, the commission not only provides anonymised details of the cases it had completed in 2017, but also gives an overview of the central aims and goals for its research integrity strategy.
The cases discussed relate to issues of:
- authorship, plagiarism, ghostwriting;
- citation of withdrawn publications,
- anullment of academic titles;
- ethics approvals;
- data analysis, data ownership, data protection and inaccurate presentation of data;
- right of use of visual materials;
- approval processes for doctoral theses;
- wage-dumping.
Why is this important?
By making its annual report publicly available, the Commission demonstrates the transparency of its reporting processes and its commitment to accountability in matters involving public inquiries, complaints and investigations. Moreover, it provides the public the opportunity to see the ways in which the Commission responds to queries and manages its investigations.
For whom is this important?
ResearchersResearch Integrity OfficersResearch Ethics CommitteesResearch institutionsPolicy makersGeneral public
What are the best practices?
Apart from its work on concrete inquiries, the Commission states that its aim is to play a critical role in further developing the guidelines governing good scientific practice. It sees the alignment of legal requirements with the principles of research integrity as a key task for the future. To that end, the Commission states that it will initiate a regular forum on "Good Scientific Practice and the Law".
