Form:Theme

• Choose a category:
• Guide (7)
• Initiative (29)
• Instruction (71)
• Interactive Content (5)
• Report (16)
• Resource (1078)
• Theme (188)

Back

Themes

Learn about important Good Science themes that will stimulate awareness and dialogue around relevant issues or 'hot topics'. We also invite you to add or edit the pages in this section.

Add Theme

Theme

Click on one or more items below to narrow your results.

For whom is this important?

;Academic institutionsAcademic staffAdministratorsAdvisors of studentsAll stakeholders in researchAnthropologistsAuthorsBachelor studentsCivil society organisationsClinical ethics consultantsClinical researchersCollaborating researchersComputer scientistsData protection officersDecision makersDoctoral studentsEarly career researchersEditorsEducatorsEthics committee membersEveryoneFaculty membersFundersFunding agenciesFunding institutionsGeneral publicGraduate and postgraduate studentsGraduate studentsHigh school studentsHuman rights defendersIndustryJournal editorsJournal publishersJournalsJunior researchersLaboratory researchersLibrariansMaster studentsMediaMentorsOtherPIPatientsPatients/participantsPeer reviewersPeer-reviewersPhD StudentsPhD studentsPharma IndustryPhysiciansPolicy makersPolicy-makersPostdocsPrincipal investigatorsProfessorsPublishersQualitative researchersResearch Ethics CommitteesResearch Integrity OfficersResearch funding organisationsResearch institutionsResearch integrity trainersResearch organisationsResearch performing organisationsResearch subjectsResearchersReserchersReviewersScientistsSenior researchersStudentsSupervisorsTeachersTrainers in trainingUndergraduate studentsUniversitiesacademic staffdepartment leaderseveryonefundershealth care professionalsindustry stakeholdersmedical researchersmentorsphd studentspolicy-makers in scienceresearch integrity researchersresearch leadersresearch studentsresearchersstudentssupervsupport staff

Research Area

;LS - Life SciencesLS 02.10 - BioinformaticsLS 02.12 - BiostatisticsLS 04.06 - Cancer and its biological basisLS 07.03 - Pharmacology, pharmacogenomics, drug discovery and design, drug therapyLS 07.08 - Health services, health care researchLS 07.11 - Medical ethicsPE - Physical Sciences and EngineeringPE 01 - MathematicsPE 03.16 - Physics of biological systemsPE 06 - Computer Science and InformaticsPE 10.03 - Climatology and climate changeSH - Social Sciences and HumanitiesSH 02 - Institutions, Values, Beliefs and BehaviourSH 03.03 - Environmental regulations and climate negotiations

Who

;ALLEAARCAAdriano TortAlzheimer Center AmsterdamAmerican Journal of PsychiatryAmitav BanerjeeAmsterdam UMCAmy GutmannAna MarušićAnne-Marie CoriatAstrid HooghiemstraBrian HoleBrian NosekBrian ResnickCOPECarl T. BergstromCaroline WintererChealsye BowleyCroatian Committee on Ethics in Science and Higher EducationDan EdelsteinDavid M. BerryDavid MoherDavid RansohoffDavid T MellorDe Jonge AkademieDewicca NadillaDiane KelsallDianne BryantDigital Curation CentreEMBOENERIEdward DienerElie AkiElisabeth D. LazarkouElisabeth Jean WoodErnesto Galbán RodríguezFeng XieFrancesco de VirgilioFrank KupperGerben ter RietGiovanna CeseraniGiovanni ApoloneGuy WiddershovenHegelHelene SneeHet ActeursgenootschapICMJEINSPIREIan ChalmersJack StilgoeJacquiline G. WarellJames MosimannJames WagnerJan-Helge SolbakkJason L. EndacottJevin D. WestJohn DahlbergJohn FletcherJohn IoannidisJon HolmJulia MenonJunior ResearcherLarry A. PaceLee MorgenbesserLeo Kennedy-ShafferLex BouterLisa SugiuraMai Har ShamMarek HołowieckiMario MaličkiMark DubbelmanMeredith L. WeissMichael OchsnerMichele JackobsenMichèle B NuijtenMilo PuhanNSRINamrata KotwaniNiccole LazarNicole ColemanNicole FoegerNikki Bibler ZaidiNina Kancewicz-HoffmanNussbaumORIOffice of Research IntegrityOlavo B AmaralPHSPaige BrownPaul GlasziouPaula FindlenPaula RossPhil MacnaghtenRené Von SchombergResearcherRichard HortonRichard OwenRichard RansohofRichard SmithRik PeelsRobert StradlingRonald WassersteinRosemary WilesSabine KleinertSaltanat JanenovaSariyatun SunardiStuart FosterSusan Camille van SchalkwykTamarinde HavenTanya HeynsUlrich DirnaglUniversity of SplitVU AmsterdamVictor Urbiola-SalvadorVirginia BarbourVrije Universiteit AmsterdamZé H Targino

When

;201120152018202028/02/202230/05/2022March 2022PresentSeptember 2020

Where

;AmsterdamCroatiaEuropeMaltaSingaporeThe NetherlandsUnited StatesUniversity of Split

Virtues & Values

;AccountabilityAccuracyAutonomyAvailabilityBeneficenceCareCollaborative spiritCollegialityCompassionConfidentialityConscientiousnessCredibilityCuriosityDignityDoing goodEqualityExcellenceFairnessGender EqualityGood stewardshipHonestyHumilityImpartialityIndependenceIntegrityMoralityNeutralityObjectivityOpennessPrecisionProfessional courtesy and fairnessProfessionalismPunctualityQualityRationalityReflexivityReliabilityReproducibilityResepctRespectResponsibilitySafetyScrupulousnessSelf-disciplineSincerityTransparencyTrustworthinessfairnessintegrityjusticeleadershipproductivityresearch climaterigourstewardshiptransparency

Good Practices & Misconduct

;Academic ReputationAcademic Responsibility of UniversityAdherence to RegulationsAllegation of MisconductAllegations of misconductAltmetricsAnimal ethicsAnonymityAnonymizationAppropriate respect for versus paternalist treatment of research participantsAuthorshipAuthorship and ContributionAuthorship assignementAuthorship criteriaBalancing Harm and BenefitsBalancing harms and benefitsBeneficenceBiasBiosecurityBullyingCitingClinical trialsCollaborative researchCollaborative scienceCommunicationComplaints procedureConfidentialityConflict of InterestConflict of interestConsentCopyrightData ManagementData ProtectionData managementData sharingEngaging in methodologically questionable research practicesEthical DilemmaEthical approval by necessary bodyEthicsExperimental designFabricationFalsificationFinancial conflict of interestFinancial responsibilitiesFunders’ responsibilitiesGood PracticeGrant applicationsGraph manipulationHARKingHarmHegel's questionImage manipulationInformed consentInstitutional ResponsibilitiesInstitutional responsibilitiesIntegrityIntellectual propertyInternational collaborationJournal RetractionsMentor-trainee relationshipMentor/trainee relationshipMentoringMentorship responsibilitiesMethodologyMisconductMisconduct InvestigationsMisrepresentation of resultsMonitoring researchMoral Case DeliberationMoral reasoningMulti-perspectivityNon-publicationObligations to Research SubjectsOpen accessOpen scienceP-HackingP-value HackingPeer ReviewPeer reviewPeer review ethics violationPerverse incentivesPlagiarismPower abusePre-registrationsPrivacyProfessional standardsPublic CommunicationPublication EthicsPublication ethicsPublication violationQuestionable research practiceQuestionable research practicesREC approvalReportingReproducibilityResearch EnvironmentsResearch IntegrityResearch MisconductResearch Misconduct InvestigationResearch cultureResearch ethicsResearch integrityResearch involving animalsResearch involving childrenResearch misconductResearch wasteResearch with HumansResearch with humansRespectResponsibilityResponsible researchRetractionReusing Published DataReusing Published MaterialSafeguardsSafetyScience PolicyScience policyScientific MisdonductScope of University's Complaints ProcedureSelection biasSexual harassmentSocial responsibilitiesSupervisionTragic questionTrainingVulnerable and non-competent subjectsVulnerable populationWhistleblowersWhistleblowingWork environmentinappropriate autorshipplanning

Type

;Good PracticesMisconduct & MisbehaviorsOtherPrinciples & Aspirations

189 Themes ordered by recently added

View (previous 250 | next 250) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

Cognitive dissonance and moral distress

Collaborative working

Collaboration In Research

Cross-boundary collaborations

High income and low- and middle-income country collaborations

Conflict of interests

Conflict of interest in peer review

Conflict of interest: a research integrity and research ethics perspective

Editorial conflicts of interest

Intellectual conflicts of interest

The influence of pharmaceutical company on drug availability

Data Practices and Management

Anonymisation and pseudonymisation

Data management plans

FAIR principles: sharing data for maximisation of results

Feedback of findings in genome-wide association studies

How to select trustworthy repositories

Imputation of missing data in clinical trials

Methods to increase data availability

Sharing and preserving data in repositories

Development and Value of National Research Integrity Codes

Dialogue versus debate

Dutch National Survey on Research Integrity

Epistemic virtues

Funders

Conflicts of interest in the review of grant proposals

Industry funded research

Intellectual property rights in research collaborations

Monitoring funding processes

How to be a good lab partner

The ethics of managing a laboratory or research group

Mertonian norms

Moral conflict and moral dilemma

Dilemmas in daily practice

Peer review

Open peer review - transparent way of gatekeeping science

Peer Review in the Social Sciences and Humanities

Post-publication peer review

Poor mentoring or supervision of early career researcherers

Preprint servers

Protecting research subjects

Balancing harms and benefits

Clarifying the aims of a research study

Conducting research in high risk locations

Confidentiality

Ethical considerations in dealing with human remains

Ethical issues in qualitative research

Ethical issues of involving children with disabilities in research

Incidental research findings

Informed assent

Informed consent

Internet Research Ethics

Privacy in research

Research with animals

Research with children

Research with humans

Vulnerable and non-competent subjects in clinical trials

Publication

Affiliations

Authorship criteria

Consent for publication (Author)

Consent for publication (Participant)

High Integration of Research Monographs in the European Open Science (HIRMEOS)

Initiative for Open Abstracts (I4OA)

Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC)

Open access publishing: the new norm?

Publishers - COPE guidelines

Retractions: correcting the scientific literature

Standards of authorship

Theme:B5de63bc-893f-489b-bb5e-2457ac04671e

Qualitative research

Questionable Research Practices in Analysis and Reporting

Communicate results to the general public before a peer reviewed publication is available

Data driven hypotheses without disclosure (‘HARKing’)

Duplicate publications and secondary publications

Funding (Sponsorship) bias

Hypothesizing after the results are known (HARKing)

Improper data use (a bias distorting research results)

Inaccurate representation of results in the media

Inferring from P-values

Insufficiently reported study flaws and limitations

Non-reporting of negative findings

Outcome reporting bias

P-value hacking

Publication bias (positive results)

Salami publication

Selective citation

Spin of research results

Questionable Research Practices in Collaboration

(re)submitting without consent of all authors

Being grossly unfair to your collaborators

Fake peer-reviewing

Gender bias

Honorary or gift authorship

Hostile peer review

Inappropriate authorship

Not acknowledging contributors who do not qualify for authorship

Research collaboration

Self-plagiarism

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

Turning a blind eye to breaches of integrity

Unfair reviewing

Questionable Research Practices in Data Collection

Inadequately handle or store data or (bio)materials

Keeping inadequate notes of the research process

Questionable Research Practices in Study Design

Ignoring substantial safety risks of studies

Inappropriate study design

Non-disclosure of changes to the research design

Posing irrelevant research questions

Replicability

Forensic Statistics to detect Data Fabrication

Preregistration of animal study protocols

Prospective registration of clinical trials

Statistical pre-registration

Replicability in the Humanities

Research culture

Connecting researchers through ORCID

Digital humanities

Discipline specific codes and guidelines on research integrity

Governance of research integrity: Options for a coordinated approach in Europe

Grading the quality of evidence in clinical practice guidelines

Image Integrity

Institutional codes of conduct for research integrity

Institutional policies and procedures for research misconduct

Legal rights of accused scientists

Mental health in academia

ORI - The Office of Research Integrity

Open Science

Plan S

Reasonable standards for career advancement

Research Integrity Advisors

Research Integrity Committees

Research ethics committee members' skills

Research ethics committees

Research integrity officers in Europe

Responsible Research and Innovation - RRI

Science policy

Teaching sensitive and controversial issues in divided societies

The impact of the GDPR on scientific data

Whistleblower protection/rights

Research metrics

Altmetrics

Eigenfactor

H-index

Journal Impact Factor

Journal Impact Factor based on the date of electronic publication

SCImago Journal Rankings

Research misconduct

Fabrication

Falsification

Plagiarism

Responsible mentoring

Peer review card game

Research integrity training for PhD students

Research integrity training for diverse disciplines

Respectable and honest supervision ensures responsible and ethical research in the future.

Responsible supervision

Serious gaming in research integrity education

Superb Supervision: integrity training for supervisors

Supervision

Supervision Guidelines

The ConScience App - theatre play

The Dilemma Game

The learning curve - theatre play #MeTooAcademia

The decision on ice

Values and norms

Virtues in research integrity

Empathy in History Research and Education

Fabrication

Paper Mills

Industry funded research

Sponsorship of drug and device studies by the manufacturing company

Informed consent

Informed consent in psychiatry

Initiatives promoting research integrity

"Met de billen bloot" (airing your dirty laundry)

Research Integrity and Research Ethics Scenarios for Teaching

Research Integrity champions

Research Integrity lunch meetings

Research integrity in practice: dealing with everyday dilemmas

Reward campaign

Secondary corrections

The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity

Mental health in academia

Importance of healthy lifestyle

Imposter Syndrome

Networks and projects promoting research integrity

Not acknowledging contributors who do not qualify for authorship

Not asking permission from contributors for the wording of the acknowledgement

Plagiarism

AI Generated Content

Questionable research practices & research misbehaviors

Perverse incentives

Polarized research

Predatory publishing

View (previous 250 | next 250) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)