What is this about? (Is About)
From The Embassy of Good Science
A short summary providing some details about the theme/resource (max. 75 words)
- ⧼SA Foundation Data Type⧽: Text
P
A final year PhD is invited for an interview for a position that seems too good to be true. At the interview it becomes clear the chair of the interview committee has a keen interest in the research findings of the PhD candidates research group, which are under patent, undisclosed and are currently being submitted for publication. After the interview the chair stresses his interest in the research findings and states he is looking for "team players, willing to share information with department colleagues". +
This is an online training that aims to promote research integrity through series of films and videos that regard the most important research practices. For example, it deals with official and institutional aspects of research, research ethics, questionable research practices, research misconduct such as FFP and various research dilemmas. +
Dr. Staffee was hired by local government to conduct a survey about prenatal care and later published her results, accordingly to the agreement with the government. A year later, one of Dr. Staffee's students wanted to reinterview one of the research subjects in the study in order to include the new interview in her dissertation. The research subject considered this a violation of privacy. The case study asks how such situations should be handled and how to protect the sources' privacy. +
This document describes the composition, duties and procedures of the Science Ethics Committee (SEC), which is a legally-recognized body created to enable research integrity in the country. From the election of members to organizational proceeding to the handling of misconduct cases, ell aspects of the SEC are covered in this guideline. +
A researcher delays looking at grant application she has been assigned to review and asks his trainee to review some of the grant proposals. +
A procrastinating researcher must face a review board when he has not finished his assignment. +
This blog provides details about the retraction of a paper that was published in ''Current Opinion in Psychology.'' This retracted paper showed too much similarity with another manuscript that was published by the same author, Prof. Brad Bushman. +
This policy brief from the PRINTEGER project presents recommendations for science policy makers and research managers on how to embed research integrity into the core of research excellence rather than treating it as an add-on. It begins by noting that the proliferation of codes, guidelines, and institutional policies can overwhelm researchers and institutions, often resulting in fragmentation and inconsistency. Therefore, PRINTEGER advocates shifting the focus from individual misconduct to organisational and systemic responsibility, and linking integrity with broader research governance, evaluation, and related policies (e.g. data protection). The brief includes conceptual clarifications about the relationships between “research integrity” and “misconduct,” arguing they should not be treated as direct opposites but as distinct yet related domains. It presents a set of recommendations, such as combining virtue-based and principle-based integrity policies, involving researchers in policy design, making integrity part of evaluation and incentives, clarifying misconduct procedures, and aligning with legal and ethical frameworks (including GDPR) +
Promoting responsible conduct in research through "survival skills" workshops: some mentoring is best done in a crowd +
The aim of the study was to offer an educational model which would provide graduate students with instruction in writing research articles, making oral presentations, obtaining employment or funding, supervising and teaching. The authors concluded that this would lead to the consideration of ethical aspects in a researcher's career, since they are not included in traditional ethics courses. +
This is a fictional case of a doctoral student and her supervisor who would like to publish data in the form of ethnographic photography. However, there are facing the following three challenges: a) permission for publishing photographs of the community researched had not initially been sought from the ethics review board, b) nor had it been sought from the subjects photographed, and, c) the photographic material contains images that might be considered questionable child rearing practices by today’s western societies’ standards. +
This study aims to evaluate research careers of physicians enrolled in the Program in Clinical Effectiveness (PCE) at Harvard School of Public Health with an emphasis on clinical research. It demonstrates that physicians who enrolled in the PCE at an early age and generalist physicians were particularly successful in establishing careers as clinician–investigators. Therefore, the study concludes that programs such as the PCE can help to sustain the workforce of physician–investigators. +
This is a factual case. +
Protecting peer review: Correspondence chronology and ethical analysis regarding logothetis vs. shmuel and leopold +
As the complexity of scientific investigation has advanced, bio‐medical research has progressively adopted a team‐based approach to research. In the life sciences, brain imaging is one of the most technically advanced and integrative disciplines. In this collaborative environment, scientific disagreements as well as inter‐personal conflicts inevitably arise. Investigators may disagree, for example, on the adequacy of the data for publication, the most appropriate analyses to be performed, or the appropriate conclusions to be drawn from the accumulated experiments. In the context of such disagreements, more fundamental disputes often arise, including the right of individual investigators to publish data acquired cooperatively. When efforts are made to publish disputed data, journal editors necessarily become involved. +
Research subjects should be protected to minimize the harms and maximize the benefits of research. Research subjects include both humans and animals, and both types of research are subject to regulations, professional codes, and even international agreements. +
Citizen science, according to the [https://www.ecsa.ngo/ European Citizen Science Association (ESCA)], is "an ‘umbrella’ term that describes a variety of ways in which the public participates in science. The main characteristics are that: (1) citizens are actively involved in research, in partnership or collaboration with scientists or professionals;and (2) there is a genuine outcome, such as new scientific knowledge, conservation action or policy change." +
A junior researcher in charge of an experiment involving animal subjects allows several protocol violations to occur, resulting in public backlash. +
A young social psychologist "fabricated" five experiments on social discrimination that she conducted while at Harvard University. In addition to retracting four published studies,she was banned from receiving federal research funds or serving on government advisory committees for 5 years. +
The career of a promising young social psychologist lies in ruins following her admission that she “fabricated” five experiments on social discrimination that she conducted while at Harvard University. Last week the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) of the Department of Health and Human Services announced that Karen Ruggiero, 33, who last year moved to the University of Texas (UT), Austin, “engaged in scientific misconduct by fabricating data in research supported by the National Institutes of Health.” A September report from Harvard assistant dean Kathleen Buckley to Harvard's Standing Committee on Professional Conduct cites Ruggiero's comments in a 21 August letter that the manuscripts were based on “fabricated” data. In addition to retracting four published studies, Ruggiero is banned from receiving federal research funds or serving on government advisory committees for 5 years. A woman who answered the phone at her Texas home declined to discuss the case. +
This case is about a former graduate student in psychology. He falsified data in several published papers and conference abstracts. +
These are the slides of a lecture in Dutch, on the psychology of misbehavior and research misbehavior in particular. +
