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
R
A researcher finds out that a drug she is promoting at a pharmacological conference may have serious adverse effects. +
A researcher on the cutting edge of science fails to publish impactful findings because they are more interested in securing future funding. +
Jenny Diaz is nearing her tenure evaluation and wants to improve her publication record by submitting two papers based on data from a project that is still underway. She is worried that doing so would jeopardize future findings of the projects and two dissertations based on the data collected through the project. The case study asks whether she should submit the articles. +
This Web page provides step-by-step guidance on how to report various censurable activities such as breaches of ethical norms, harassment, misappropriation of funds or criminal activities. It ensures that the reporter has adequate background information and that anonymity is maintained during the process. +
A mentor supervises a student who takes additional courses in another department. During a google search out of curiosity, the mentor finds out the student has plagiarised large parts of his essays for those courses. +
One of the pathways by which the scientific community confirms the validity of a new scientific discovery is by repeating the research that produced it. When a scientific effort fails to independently confirm the computations or results of a previous study, some fear that it may be a symptom of a lack of rigor in science, while others argue that such an observed inconsistency can be an important precursor to new discovery. +
The case focuses on editorial decision-making regarding controversial methodology and post-publication peer review. Two published articles focused on the effect of energy healing on an in-vitro model of disease. Whistleblower concerns were raised about the appropriateness and reproducibility of the energy healing methodology used. +
The video series is about the main issues related to the so-called reproducibility crisis. +
The University of Edinburghs Research Data Service provides a suite of tools and support that helps staff and students be effective with their research data before, during and after their project. +
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 concerning the links between '''[https://zenodo.org/record/4063597#.X3cFmpNKjxQ research environments and research integrity]'''.
It focuses on issues regarding:
*Communication of the standards governing research integrity by universities and research organizations;*Environmental pressures to commit research misconduct;*Whistleblowing and the monitoring of research misconduct;*Barriers to reporting cases of research misconduct;*Power imbalances between students/early-career researchers and senior academics.
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. +
Ethical research conduct implies the application of fundamental ethical principles and legislation to scientific research in all possible domains of research – for example biomedical research, nature sciences, social sciences and humanities. The ethics review procedure of the EC including ethics screening and ethics assessment is explained. +
The website Research Ethics Compass offers an online course designed to strengthen researchers’ ethical decision-making capacity throughout the full research lifecycle from planning, to conducting, to disseminating, managing data, and guarding against misconduct. It begins at a “foundation level” where users reflect on what ethics means, why it matters in research, and how to apply ethical approaches and theories. The site features modular tasks , learning tools, an e-portfolio template, and directs participants onward to an advanced level after completion of the basics. The structure emphasises self-reflection and active engagement rather than merely reading codes of conduct. The course was developed under the LIFE programme in 2020 and is geared towards building confidence in making ethical research choices even when the answer isn’t obvious.
[[File:Ethics1.png|center|frameless|600x600px|alt=]] +
This module introduces a collection of research ethics and integrity games developed by EU funded initiatives to deepen engagement with and reflection on research ethics and integrity topics. The games presented here can be used within and/or outside of the academic environment. The games presented here have been developed by the following EU-funded initiatives: INTEGRITY, BRIDGE, and VIRT2UE. For each game developed by each project the target audience is indicated. +
The RE4GREEN project’s first policy brief, “Embedding Environmental and Climate Ethics in Research,” addresses a gap in how existing research ethics and integrity (RE&RI) frameworks often neglect environmental and climate considerations. Drawing on supporting deliverables and stakeholder engagement, the brief proposes six actionable recommendations directed at research institutions, ethics committees, curriculum developers, and researchers. It argues that RE&RI governance should evolve to integrate sustainability, justice, and the precautionary principle, thereby aligning research practices with the broader goals of the Green Transition. The brief outlines how institutions can reform policies, embed climate-conscious training, revise evaluation criteria, ensure transparency in environmental impacts, and foster accountability. Its development followed an iterative approach: evidence gathering, stakeholder consultations (including validation by the RE4GREEN Stakeholder Advisory Board), and workshops with partner projects. The brief was presented at the 2025 European Conference on Ethics and Integrity in Academia, and will feed into subsequent policy briefs (the next focusing on safeguarding scientific integrity in climate-related research). The document also reflects lessons learned and outlines paths for further institutional change. +
This is blog on research and publication ethics. As an example, it uses the factual case of a researcher who intentionally fabricated/falsified data and manipulated images. +
The paper presents the case of Zhejiang University in China where plagiarism, fabrication and falsification was discovered by the new president who is now educating about scientific integrity in China. This is a factual case. +
This MOOC will give you an introduction to research ethics. You will receive a comprehensive overview of the main ethical issues that researchers experience in doing research with human subjects.
The course will give you the tools to apply your moral reasoning in practical, real-life scenarios in research and challenge you to reflect on case studies and provide the tools you need to conduct your own ethical assessment of a research project. Most importantly, you will learn to identify and question your own ethical biases and to build new well-reasoned arguments for your position on different ethical scenarios.
The course offers a variety of materials to study effectively and interactively. You will learn using case studies, videos, interviews, and discussions. You will engage with the course materials and other participants through exercises and open discussion boards. +
The Austrian Science Fund (FWF) is the largest funding agency for basic research in Austria that contributes to cutting-edge research both in Austria and an international level. This organization aims to foster research that supports growth in different areas- scientific, economic and cultural. As a prominent research funding organization, the FWF plays a key role in encouraging and ensuring good research practice among researchers and research institutions. In this "roadmap" guideline meant for researchers and other stakeholders, they provide guidance in four areas: principles of research ethics and good research practice, good practices in the context of funding applications, statistics on research misconduct and responsible animal testing. +
Research integrity is the core focus area for the HEADT Centre. This includes the three aspects Plagiarism, Data falsification and Image manipulation. One research goal is to develop metrics to help distinguish between the various greyscale zones that detection tools reveal which can be seen in this resource. +
This report presents the results of a survey of Scientific Europe member organisations, undertaken in 2014 by the Working Group on Research Integrity. It maps existing policies, procedures and practices for promoting research integrity and builds upon this to make a number of key recommendations for improving research integrity including processes and policies, awareness raising, training, and collaboration. +
