Latest revision as of 16:32, 27 October 2021

Themes

Take no full responsibility for the integrity of the research project and its reports

What is this about?

According to the European Code of Conduct in Research Integrity, “all partners in research collaborations take responsibility for the integrity of the research.” ¹ It is thus expected that all involved parties are aware of, and agree on the principles of research integrity, what constitutes misconduct and how potential misconduct will be handled. In addition, all authors of a publication are assumed to be answerable for the entire content of the publication, unless specified otherwise.

Why is this important?

In practice, although each member is wholly responsible for the integrity of their contribution, it could be difficult for an individual or a team to ensure the integrity of the whole project. This is especially true in collaborative projects involving several disciplines, institutions or cross-border initiatives. In the case of authorship, for instance, it can be ethically complex to attribute accountability in large, multidisciplinary projects. ² In such situations, transparency as to the role of each contributing member or team becomes crucial. Practices such as assigning Contributor Role Ontologies and Taxonomies (CROTs) are a way of recognizing and clarifying the roles of contributors. ³

For whom is this important?

ResearchersResearch institutionsAdministratorsCollaborating researchersResearch Integrity Officers

What are the best practices?

The ECoC states that all partners involved in research take full responsibility for the overall integrity of the project. All partners are also expected to have agreed at the outset on the standards of research integrity that will be maintained. ¹ This can include all aspects of the research, from conception to publication, in order to prevent ambiguity at a later stage. The Montreal Statement on Research Integrity in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations ⁴ states that all involved partners openly discuss their customary practices and expectations, including those of research integrity. While every individual is responsible fully for their own contribution, there should also be a collective responsibility for the integrity of the project. ⁴

In Detail

References:

1. The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. Accessed October 11, 2021. www.allea.org

2. TP C. Authorship matrix: a rational approach to quantify individual contributions and responsibilities in multi-author scientific articles. Sci Eng Ethics. 2014;20(2):345-361. doi:10.1007/S11948-013-9454-3

3. Vasilevsky NA, Hosseini M, Teplitzky S, et al. Is authorship sufficient for today’s collaborative research? A call for contributor roles. https://doi.org/101080/0898962120201779591. 2020;28(1):23-43. doi:10.1080/08989621.2020.1779591

4. 3rd World Conference on Research Integrity. Montreal Statement on Research Integrity in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations. 2013;(May):2013. http://www.researchintegrity.org/Statements/Montreal Statement English.pdf

Kris dierickx, Roshni Jegan contributed to this theme. Latest contribution was Oct 27, 2021

Other information

Virtues & Values

Good Practices & Misconduct

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 |Title=Take no full responsibility for the integrity of the research project and its reports
 |Is About=According to the European Code of Conduct in Research Integrity, “all partners in research collaborations take responsibility for the integrity of the research.” <sup>1</sup> It is thus expected that all involved parties are aware of, and agree on the principles of research integrity, what constitutes misconduct and how potential misconduct will be handled. In addition, all authors of a publication are assumed to be answerable for the entire content of the publication, unless specified otherwise.
-|Important Because=In practice, although each member is wholly responsible for the integrity of their contribution, it could be difficult for an individual or a team to ensure the integrity of the whole project. This is especially true in collaborative projects involving different disciplines, institutions or cross-border initiatives. In the case of authorship, for instance, it can be ethically complex to attribute accountability in large, multidisciplinary projects. <sup>2</sup>  In such situations, transparency as to the role of each contributing member or team becomes crucial. Practices such as assigning Contributor Role Ontologies and Taxonomies (CROTs) are a way of recognizing and clarifying the roles of contributors. <sup>3</sup>
+|Important Because=In practice, although each member is wholly responsible for the integrity of their contribution, it could be difficult for an individual or a team to ensure the integrity of the whole project. This is especially true in collaborative projects involving several disciplines, institutions or cross-border initiatives. In the case of authorship, for instance, it can be ethically complex to attribute accountability in large, multidisciplinary projects. <sup>2</sup>  In such situations, transparency as to the role of each contributing member or team becomes crucial. Practices such as assigning Contributor Role Ontologies and Taxonomies (CROTs) are a way of recognizing and clarifying the roles of contributors. <sup>3</sup>
 |Important For=Researchers; Research institutions; Administrators; Collaborating researchers; Research Integrity Officers
 |Has Best Practice=The ECoC states that all partners involved in research take full responsibility for the overall integrity of the project. All partners are also expected to have agreed at the outset on the standards of research integrity that will be maintained. <sup>1</sup>  This can include all aspects of the research, from conception to publication, in order to prevent ambiguity at a later stage. The Montreal Statement on Research Integrity in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations <sup>4</sup> states that all involved partners openly discuss their customary practices and expectations, including those of research integrity. While every individual is responsible fully for their own contribution, there should also be a collective responsibility for the integrity of the project. <sup>4</sup>

Difference between revisions of "Theme:906ca500-7103-40c8-86a8-824da4c80789"