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
T
"The Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) recognizes the need to improve the ways in which the outputs of scholarly research are evaluated. The declaration was developed in 2012 during the Annual Meeting of the American Society for Cell Biology in San Francisco. It has become a worldwide initiative covering all scholarly disciplines and all key stakeholders including funders, publishers, professional societies, institutions, and researchers. We encourage all individuals and organizations who are interested in developing and promoting best practice in the assessment of scholarly research to sign DORA." +
After the second World Conference on Research Integrity, various stakeholders set out principles of research integrity. +
The Student Statement on The Right to Research (R2RC) (2025), produced by the Right to Research Coalition, provides an international framework for open science and open access, particularly relevant for North America. Written in English, it translates high-level principles into actionable guidance for researchers, institutions, funders, and publishers worldwide, promoting openness as the default while respecting ethics, privacy, intellectual property, and security. The statement links openness to research quality, reproducibility, equitable access, and faster translation of knowledge, especially for communities with limited subscription access. Core elements include open access to publications with preferred licensing (e.g., Creative Commons), deposition in trusted repositories, FAIR data principles, and comprehensive data management plans. Responsibilities for authors and institutions include funding acknowledgment, rights retention, and budgeting, while justified embargoes and exceptions for sensitive or security-relevant data are transparently documented. The document encourages enabling infrastructure—repositories, registries, discovery services—and aligns with international initiatives such as Plan S and the European Open Science Cloud. Assessment emphasizes the quality of openness, including machine-readable metadata, persistent identifiers, and sharing of methods, code, and data. Equity, multilingual communication, and capacity building are emphasized. Implementation relies on planning, institutional support, and funder-backed infrastructure. The statement serves as a practical reference, checklist, and benchmark for transparency, reproducibility, and alignment with global norms. +
A physician gives a young anthropologist a questionnaire that appears to have been taken from a research proposal rejected by the physician. +
This law aims to encourage cutting-edge research and technological innovation in Switzerland, mainly at the level of Governmental actions and through laying down rules for other funding agencies. +
The Swiss National Science Foundation and National Research Council's Regulations on scientific misconduct +
The Swiss National Science Foundation (SNCF) is a private research funding organization that supports fundamental research in diverse fields. Their regulations on scientific misconduct are intended for all researchers and research institutions and partners who apply for, or are funded by, an SNCF grant. This is a legal document, since it is based on the Research and Innovation Promotion Act. +
This is a factual case. +
This code of conduct promotes ethical research in lower-income countries by advising on how to prevent so-called ‘ethics dumping’: the practice of performing unethical research in lower-income countries. +
The TRUST Code: A Global Code of Conduct for Equitable Research Partnerships () is a international framework authored by nan, in english, targeting nan. Originating from International, it aims to formalise principles of research integrity and open practice. It emphasises honesty, accountability, professional courtesy, and stewardship of resources, linking these values to reproducibility, credibility, and societal trust in research. The text covers responsibilities of researchers, institutions, funders, and journals, spelling out expectations for good practice in planning, conducting, publishing, and reviewing research. Common provisions include clear authorship criteria, proper citation and acknowledgement, management of conflicts of interest, transparency of methods and data, responsible supervision, and fair peer review. It also establishes procedures for handling breaches of integrity, defining misconduct, and setting up investigation mechanisms that ensure due process, proportional sanctions, and learning opportunities. By aligning with international standards, it connects local policy to global norms, reinforcing mobility of researchers and comparability of practices across borders. The document integrates the principle of education—training for students and staff on responsible conduct—ensuring that integrity is taught as a core skill rather than assumed knowledge. It also incorporates guidance on emerging issues such as data management, digital tools, open science, and new forms of dissemination, embedding integrity in contemporary workflows. Practical tools often include checklists, codes of behaviour, reporting templates, and FAQs, translating high-level principles into day-to-day actions. The intended audience spans researchers, supervisors, institutions, and policymakers, all of whom need clarity on their roles in safeguarding the credibility of research. Equity and diversity appear as cross-cutting themes, recognising that integrity involves creating inclusive environments free from discrimination, harassment, or exploitation. Overall, the resource situates research integrity as both a personal commitment and an institutional responsibility, embedding it into the full research cycle from design to dissemination. Annexes may provide case studies, historical context, and references to international declarations such as Singapore or Montreal statements. Definitions and glossaries support consistent interpretation, and contact points or ombudsperson systems are described to lower barriers to reporting. These features help the resource serve not only as a policy but also as a practical handbook.
This text provides a list of over 400 papers from different authors and affiliations that have been generated by the same source. Similarities in Western blot images, greyscale bar graphs, and the title structure strongly indicate their paper mill origin. +
The Teaching of Controversial Issues During Elementary-Level History Instruction: Greek-Cypriot Teachers' Perceptions and Emotions +
This article show results of a study of 18 Greek-Cypriot teachers' perceptions and emotions when it comes to teaching controversial issues in primary-level history education. The study shows that even though the teachers recognize the value and benefits of teaching these issues in primary schools, they did not find feasible implementing this approach in nationally divided Cyprus. +
This is a factual case describing threats to the integrity of research in environmental and occupational medicine. These threats can stem from conflicts of interest between the parties funding and performing research. Pressures from some industries and governments can lead to the distortion and suppression of scientific findings, attacks on whistleblowers, and manipulation of eminent scientists'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"'.
'"`UNIQ--references-00000001-QINU`"' +
Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee denies the approval of a study involving animal experimentation on the grounds that alternative methods are available. +
The ''TRUST Code Supplement (16 May 2025)'' is an addendum to the original TRUST Code of Conduct, providing additional guidelines for conducting ethical research in global crises such as pandemics, natural disasters, or climate emergencies. The supplement builds on the original TRUST Code's core principles of fairness, respect, care, and honesty, emphasizing the need for these values to guide research during times of crisis.
In particular, the supplement addresses the challenges researchers face when acting under urgent, high-pressure conditions. It offers practical guidance on maintaining research integrity, ensuring transparency, and promoting accountability. It underscores the importance of informed consent, highlighting how it must be adapted to crisis settings while still respecting participants’ rights and dignity. Furthermore, the document emphasizes community engagement and the equitable distribution of research benefits, urging researchers to consider the needs of vulnerable or affected populations.
Researchers are encouraged to adopt culturally sensitive and context-specific approaches to ensure that their work aligns with local values and needs. Ultimately, the supplement aims to help researchers navigate the ethical complexities of crisis-driven research, ensuring that their work contributes positively to crisis response efforts while upholding the principles of equity and social responsibility. The supplement strengthens the original TRUST Code’s goal of fostering responsible and ethical research partnerships. +
This is a historical case about Dr. Herbert Green's unethical experiment concerning the treatment given to women "with a premalignant cell condition in the neck of the womb, known as carcinoma in situ (CIS)". Major ethical issues include "disregarding therapeutic obligations" (or as others have called it "adopting an unorthodox approach to the management of CIS"), and lack of informed consent (p. 269).
'"`UNIQ--references-00000000-QINU`"' +
This guideline lays down detailed, practical standards of conduct for all members of the university, covering many aspects that are not addressed by legal texts. It highlights the core values of education: professionalism, equality and academic freedom, as well as perspectives on teamwork, integrity and sustainability. +
Although Malta has no national document on research integrity, the University of Malta expects its students, researchers and staff to abide by its code of practice. It describes both the ethical principles and their application, with special attention to research involving human participants or animals. +
This concise guideline, intended for all researchers at the university of Oslo, expresses the most important aspects of research ethics in ten lines. +
The guidance provided by supervisors to students (Bachelor's, Master's and PhD students) is of great importance. At the same time, these relationships are inherently asymmetrical and therefore could be prone to exploitation. The University of Oslo, through this guideline, provides standards of good conduct for both students and supervisors. +
To maintain a secure and open and to foster integrity, conflicts should be prevented as much as possible. This guideline describes what constitutes conflicts, how they can be prevented, the procedure for reporting conflicts and how they are handled. It applies only to conflicts among employees;conflicts between employees and students are handled separately. +
