Why is this important? (Important Because)

From The Embassy of Good Science
A description to provide more focus to the theme/resource (max. 200 words)


  • ⧼SA Foundation Data Type⧽: Text
Showing 20 pages using this property.
C
Many people (both editors and investigators) feel that the misrepresentation of authorship is a form of research misconduct, and that honesty in reporting science should extend to authorship. They argue that, if scientists are dishonest about their relationship to their work, this undermines confidence in the reporting of the work itself.  +
Hier een verantwoording voor ....we dit faciliteren  +
Conflict of interests erodes objectivity of science and leads to corruption, and most certainly create a space for bias in decision making. Conflict of interest can happen in a variety of research areas and human activities, but when we take consequences into consideration, in some areas such as science and research it becomes especially important.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000293-QINU`"' A recent review revealed that industry sponsored studies are more often in favour to the sponsors’ products compared with studies with other sources of funding.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000294-QINU`"' Because of the effect it can potentially have on research, scientific journals require a separate declaration of conflict of interest when submitting scientific articles.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000295-QINU`"' '"`UNIQ--references-00000296-QINU`"'  +
A variety of situations can lead to conflicts of interests within the CSIC, such as research-related collaborations and consultations, evaluations, training, publication, financial support provision and knowledge transfer activities. It is important for individual researchers and for research teams to be aware of these potential conflicts in order to avoid them. In addition, institutions should also have structures and systems in place to handle conflicts of interest. This document sets a framework for institutional measures.  +
Currently, citizen science is becoming more and more important in different fields of science. For example, in natural sciences, it enables large-scale data collection by involving a vast number of individuals which would be challenging to achieve for traditional research methods within the same timeframe and resources. This training will guide you through the crucial elements of responsible citizen science, including protection of human research participants, plants, animals and ecosystems; rights of citizen scientists; conflicts of interest; quality of research outputs etc. By the end of this training, you will gain a deeper understanding of responsible open science and acquire the following skills and attitudes necessary for responsible practising of citizen science.  +
When doing a research concerning a sensitive subject, it is important to think about the effect the results can have on the research population and to .  +
It is unusual to encounter cases of ethics violations on citizen's science and similar disciplines. The author raises some interesting points for discussion.  +
<span lang="EN-GB">Providing assent alongside consent in research involving children is essential for several reasons.</span> <span lang="EN-GB">Assent protects participants' rights by ensuring that the child's views are acknowledged and respected, even though the child is not legally able to give fully informed consent.</span> <span lang="EN-GB">Upholding the principles of consent and assent is essential for conducting research ethically, honoring both autonomy and dignity.</span> <span lang="EN-GB">Applying these principles ensures that all parties involved in the research are adequately informed and that the interests of all participants, especially when dealing with vulnerable groups such as children, are protected.</span>  +
It provides a framework or a set of rules to protect human dignity and the bio-rights of individuals. It is an important benchmark in the protection of human rights related to biomedicine and technology.  +
This factual case demonstrates that there may be a significant time lapse between the noticing and reporting of a case of plagiarism (or indeed, other research ethics violation) to the appropriate resolution of such cases. The article discusses solutions on shortening the investigation time for allegations in Universities as well as ways to encourage universities sticking to their own misconduct enquiry timelines and policies.  +
Scientific misconduct in drug trials, especially the modification of research outcomes, severely endangers the health of future patients who will be treated with the drug. In addition, it leads to the waste of research funds and diminishes public trust in science. Therefore, offences such as these must be punished.  +
Adding an initiative page for your project is one of the quickest and easiest ways to increase the visibility of your outputs (and hard work!) across the Embassy, and to get the most value from the platform.  +
A recent review'"`UNIQ--ref-0000001C-QINU`"' has found that published cases of research ethics violations in Social Sciences and Humanities disciplines constitute a very small percentage (4.3% and 1.3% respectively). It is important to flag examples of ethics misconduct in disciplines like Law.  +
Accuracy in referencing is important for several reasons'"`UNIQ--ref-00000006-QINU`"' such as avoiding improper appropriation of others ideas, allowing readers to further research certain topics which might be only briefly touched upon in the text, embedding the text in the relevant literature on the same topic and supporting ones claims on scientific evidence which has been peer reviewed by other researchers. Reflecting on this case, for instance in a classroom setting, can support the understanding good referencing practices and help in avoiding mistakes'"`UNIQ--ref-00000007-QINU`"'. '"`UNIQ--references-00000008-QINU`"'  +
Cultural differences play an important role in the research environment. Not being aware of such differences can cause miscommunication and even be a cause of research misconduct.  +
Education, research and innovation are basic pillars of the development of contemporary society. The trust in research rests on the trust in the integrity of researchers and the reliability of results of their scientific work. The outcome and interpretation of their research can be verified by the scientific community, but cannot be verified by the public for which the new knowledge is intended. Therefore, if science is to remain trustworthy, researchers must observe basic moral principles in their work, and must be people of integrity and honesty.  +
D
Research and research-based education is of central and increasing importance in developing society’s knowledge base, increasing welfare and providing informed answers to local and global challenges.  +
The strategy for open access focuses on two Open Access models: Golden and Green. While Golden Open Access is encouraged where possible, it should not be used when there is an added expenditure involved. The default Open Access model, therefore, should be Green Open Access. This guideline also stresses that legislation is not the way to ensure Open Access to all research. Rather, co-operation and awareness are the main mechanisms to enable compliance. Open Access should also be implemented using means that do not compromise the quality of research, but only add to its value.  +
The case demonstrates that: a) sometimes, what initially seems as a violation of research ethics procedures might be the result of a mistake, often more easily performed by researchers in their early careers; b) there may be a lack of clarity on how to deal with what might seem – but not necessarily proven – to be a case of research misconduct in a team. This is a useful case for students as it provides some practical advice of who a student can raise such concerns with. It provides some ideas on how one can proceed in a manner that would protect all parties involved from potentially unnecessary tribulations.  +
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. 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) [https://zenodo.org/record/4063648#.X3cHCpNKjxQ '''Data Practices and Management'''] 6) Collaborative Working 7) Publication and Dissemination 8) Reviewing, Evaluating and Editing <br />  +
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.
5.2.9