Difference between revisions of "Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3"
From The Embassy of Good Science
(Created page with "{{Resource |Resource Type=Education |Title=Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project |Is About=Members of The Embassy of...") |
|||
| (10 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Resource | {{Resource | ||
| − | |Resource Type= | + | |Resource Type=Scenarios |
|Title=Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project | |Title=Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project | ||
|Is About=Members of The Embassy of Good Science have developed a set of eight scenarios for educational purposes and to stimulate strategic thinking about issues in research ethics and research integrity. | |Is About=Members of The Embassy of Good Science have developed a set of eight scenarios for educational purposes and to stimulate strategic thinking about issues in research ethics and research integrity. | ||
| − | This scenario presents a hypothetical narrative on the theme of [https:// | + | This scenario presents a hypothetical narrative on the theme of [https://zenodo.org/record/4062216#.X3YCVZNKhjU '''Publication and Dissemination'''.] |
It focuses on issues regarding: | It focuses on issues regarding: | ||
| − | * Dual submissions | + | *Dual submissions |
| − | * Authorship lists | + | *Authorship lists |
| − | * Plagiarism | + | *Plagiarism |
| − | * Complaints procedures | + | *Complaints procedures |
| − | * Editorial decisions | + | *Editorial decisions |
| − | * Retraction | + | *Retraction |
It is interspersed with questions and resource suggestions that help guide researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators in their deliberations concerning the research integrity issues raised by the narrative. | It is interspersed with questions and resource suggestions that help guide researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators in their deliberations concerning the research integrity issues raised by the narrative. | ||
| − | |Important Because=The scenarios are designed to help researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators to become better acquainted with ''[https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/hi/h2020-ethics_code-of-conduct_en.pdf The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity]'' ('ECCRI') as a regulatory document that articulates the standards of good research practice. | + | |Important Because=The scenarios are designed to help researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators to become better acquainted with ''[https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/hi/h2020-ethics_code-of-conduct_en.pdf The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity]'' ('ECCRI' or 'ECoC') as a regulatory document that articulates the standards of good research practice. |
They also allow users to reflect on and apply their own national and institutional research ethics and research integrity codes as well as other key regulatory documents and guidelines. | They also allow users to reflect on and apply their own national and institutional research ethics and research integrity codes as well as other key regulatory documents and guidelines. | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
The goal is for the user to gain knowledge of the standards associated with good research practices and to make sense of these standards in different research contexts. | The goal is for the user to gain knowledge of the standards associated with good research practices and to make sense of these standards in different research contexts. | ||
| − | According to the ECCRI, there are eight categories of research contexts that are covered by the standards of good research practice: | + | According to the ECCRI/ECoC, there are eight categories of research contexts that are covered by the standards of good research practice: |
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
6) Collaborative Working | 6) Collaborative Working | ||
| − | 7) [https:// | + | 7) [https://zenodo.org/record/4062216#.X3YCVZNKhjU '''Publication and Dissemination'''] |
8) Reviewing, Evaluating and Editing | 8) Reviewing, Evaluating and Editing | ||
| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Link | {{Link | ||
| − | |Has Link=https:// | + | |Has Link=https://zenodo.org/record/4062216#.X3YCVZNKhjU |
}} | }} | ||
{{Related To | {{Related To | ||
| − | |Related To Resource=Resource:5bbdd729-8f96-432a-a0ee-56510e343d01;Resource:38cabc43-2b53-4c98-80ea-89b97ef5107d;Resource:55cea558-b370-4eec-b4f5-0de97f815e67;Resource:31097e7a-2080-4aee-b60d-e1e1a5b15888 | + | |Related To Resource=Resource:5bbdd729-8f96-432a-a0ee-56510e343d01;Resource:38cabc43-2b53-4c98-80ea-89b97ef5107d;Resource:55cea558-b370-4eec-b4f5-0de97f815e67;Resource:31097e7a-2080-4aee-b60d-e1e1a5b15888;Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead;Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a;Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70;Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4;Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674;Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183;Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6 |
|Related To Theme=Theme:Cbe88760-7f0e-4d6d-952b-b724bb0f375e;Theme:83f33f33-e9ba-4589-b450-92e3992a22db;Theme:A22bd155-7f88-4750-aa9c-cba9ad72cbec;Theme:13ae94da-15d6-426f-8f6e-9134fb57e267;Theme:02592695-e4f8-473c-a944-adfe0d8094c0;Theme:F3ddbf9b-e3c4-47b7-97cd-6239ce7a32c3;Theme:9fc17763-af35-4688-a87f-165f3b120897;Theme:883697c8-d319-4224-991e-ce063d648efd;Theme:0953795c-fb38-4080-a56f-fe503c4875bd;Theme:9ac8c1db-f98b-41ee-858d-a8c93a647108;Theme:4d29ae67-bee8-4203-b78f-320bc63025d0 | |Related To Theme=Theme:Cbe88760-7f0e-4d6d-952b-b724bb0f375e;Theme:83f33f33-e9ba-4589-b450-92e3992a22db;Theme:A22bd155-7f88-4750-aa9c-cba9ad72cbec;Theme:13ae94da-15d6-426f-8f6e-9134fb57e267;Theme:02592695-e4f8-473c-a944-adfe0d8094c0;Theme:F3ddbf9b-e3c4-47b7-97cd-6239ce7a32c3;Theme:9fc17763-af35-4688-a87f-165f3b120897;Theme:883697c8-d319-4224-991e-ce063d648efd;Theme:0953795c-fb38-4080-a56f-fe503c4875bd;Theme:9ac8c1db-f98b-41ee-858d-a8c93a647108;Theme:4d29ae67-bee8-4203-b78f-320bc63025d0 | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Tags | {{Tags | ||
|Has Virtue And Value=Fairness; Honesty; Respect; Responsibility | |Has Virtue And Value=Fairness; Honesty; Respect; Responsibility | ||
| − | |Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Authorship; Publication Ethics; Plagiarism; Editorial review; Complaints procedure; Respect | + | |Has Good Practice And Misconduct=Authorship; Publication Ethics; Plagiarism; Editorial review; Complaints procedure; Respect; Peer Review; Peer review; Peer reviewing |
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 14:22, 19 October 2021
ResourcesScenarios
Publication, Dissemination and Research Integrity: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project
What is this about?
Members of The Embassy of Good Science have developed a set of eight scenarios for educational purposes and to stimulate strategic thinking about issues in research ethics and research integrity.
This scenario presents a hypothetical narrative on the theme of Publication and Dissemination.
It focuses on issues regarding:
- Dual submissions
- Authorship lists
- Plagiarism
- Complaints procedures
- Editorial decisions
- Retraction
Why is this important?
The scenarios are designed to help researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators to become better acquainted with The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity ('ECCRI' or 'ECoC') as a regulatory document that articulates the standards of good research practice.
They also allow users to reflect on and apply their own national and institutional research ethics and research integrity codes as well as other key regulatory documents and guidelines.
The goal is for the user to gain knowledge of the standards associated with good research practices and to make sense of these standards in different research contexts.
According to the ECCRI/ECoC, there are eight categories of research contexts that are covered by the standards of good research practice:
1) Research Environment
2) Training, Supervision and Mentoring
3) Research Procedures
4) Safeguards
5) Data Practices and Management
6) Collaborative Working
8) Reviewing, Evaluating and EditingFor whom is this important?
Academic staffAdministratorsDoctoral studentsEarly career researchersEditorsEthics committee membersGraduate studentsJournal editorsJunior researchersPhD StudentsPostdocsProfessorsResearch Integrity OfficersResearch institutionsResearchersSupervisors
What are the best practices?
The aim of all eight scenarios is to allow researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators to focus their reflection on core principles and research contexts that enshrine good research practice as well as their local rules and practices.
