Difference between revisions of "Resource:234e07ec-d224-48be-8ee8-12d816032526"
From The Embassy of Good Science
(Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Guidelines |Title=Recommendations for the Investigation of Research Misconduct |Has Related Initiative=Initiative:639c9790-bf80-4f21-9fc0-8027b4c0c...") |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
|Is About=The handbook, produced by ENRIO in cooperation with ENERI, offers practical, consensus-based guidelines and considerations for research institutions and national bodies tasked with investigating allegations of research misconduct or irresponsible practices. It supplements the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity by concentrating specifically on how to handle violations defining misconduct versus less severe practices, establishing investigative procedures, committee composition, transparency vs confidentiality, appeals, cross-boundary cases, sanctions, and systemic responses. It acknowledges that there is no single “one size fits all” model across Europe, due to differences in legal, institutional, cultural, and regulatory contexts. The handbook is meant as a living document, open to adaptation and revision over time as practices and norms evolve. | |Is About=The handbook, produced by ENRIO in cooperation with ENERI, offers practical, consensus-based guidelines and considerations for research institutions and national bodies tasked with investigating allegations of research misconduct or irresponsible practices. It supplements the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity by concentrating specifically on how to handle violations defining misconduct versus less severe practices, establishing investigative procedures, committee composition, transparency vs confidentiality, appeals, cross-boundary cases, sanctions, and systemic responses. It acknowledges that there is no single “one size fits all” model across Europe, due to differences in legal, institutional, cultural, and regulatory contexts. The handbook is meant as a living document, open to adaptation and revision over time as practices and norms evolve. | ||
|Important Because=This handbook is important because investigating suspected misconduct is a sensitive, intricate process that impacts individual reputations, institutional legitimacy, and public trust in science. Without clear, ethically grounded and robust procedures, investigations risk being unfair, opaque, biased, or inconsistent. The handbook helps fill that gap by offering guidance to make investigations more credible, fair, and transparent. It assists institutions, national bodies, and research communities in handling allegations responsibly protecting both complainants and respondents, promoting consistency across cases, and enabling learning from systemic issues. In cross-institution or cross-country cases, shared reference to this handbook supports smoother cooperation and comparability. | |Important Because=This handbook is important because investigating suspected misconduct is a sensitive, intricate process that impacts individual reputations, institutional legitimacy, and public trust in science. Without clear, ethically grounded and robust procedures, investigations risk being unfair, opaque, biased, or inconsistent. The handbook helps fill that gap by offering guidance to make investigations more credible, fair, and transparent. It assists institutions, national bodies, and research communities in handling allegations responsibly protecting both complainants and respondents, promoting consistency across cases, and enabling learning from systemic issues. In cross-institution or cross-country cases, shared reference to this handbook supports smoother cooperation and comparability. | ||
| − | |Important For=Research Ethics Committees and Integrity Offices; Research Institutions and Universities; Researchers | + | |Important For=Funding Agencies and Policy Makers; Legal Advisors and Ombudspersons; Research Ethics Committees and Integrity Offices; Research Institutions and Universities; Researchers |
}} | }} | ||
{{Link | {{Link | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
{{Related To}} | {{Related To}} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
| − | |Involves= | + | |Involves=ENERI consortium |
|Has Timepoint=2020 | |Has Timepoint=2020 | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 09:13, 16 October 2025
ResourcesGuidelines
Recommendations for the Investigation of Research Misconduct
Related Initiative
What is this about?
The handbook, produced by ENRIO in cooperation with ENERI, offers practical, consensus-based guidelines and considerations for research institutions and national bodies tasked with investigating allegations of research misconduct or irresponsible practices. It supplements the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity by concentrating specifically on how to handle violations defining misconduct versus less severe practices, establishing investigative procedures, committee composition, transparency vs confidentiality, appeals, cross-boundary cases, sanctions, and systemic responses. It acknowledges that there is no single “one size fits all” model across Europe, due to differences in legal, institutional, cultural, and regulatory contexts. The handbook is meant as a living document, open to adaptation and revision over time as practices and norms evolve.
Why is this important?
This handbook is important because investigating suspected misconduct is a sensitive, intricate process that impacts individual reputations, institutional legitimacy, and public trust in science. Without clear, ethically grounded and robust procedures, investigations risk being unfair, opaque, biased, or inconsistent. The handbook helps fill that gap by offering guidance to make investigations more credible, fair, and transparent. It assists institutions, national bodies, and research communities in handling allegations responsibly protecting both complainants and respondents, promoting consistency across cases, and enabling learning from systemic issues. In cross-institution or cross-country cases, shared reference to this handbook supports smoother cooperation and comparability.
For whom is this important?
Funding Agencies and Policy MakersLegal Advisors and OmbudspersonsResearch Ethics Committees and Integrity OfficesResearch Institutions and UniversitiesResearchers
