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
G
Guide to Recommendations for Responsible Practices -2013 distils national expectations for research integrity in Brazil and clarifies what researchers and institutions in Brazil need to do to comply. It reduces ambiguity, aligns local practice with international norms, and offers actionable steps that improve transparency, reproducibility, and equitable access. For policy leads, it is a benchmark; for authors and administrators, it is a practical checklist. Published by Brazilian Academy of Sciences in 2013, it is a credible reference to cite in institutional policies, training, and grant documentation. +
As described in [[Mental Health in Academia]], creating more dialogue about the topic is highly important. This guide is developed to assist opening up about stress. +
From an individual researcher's perspective, this document gives a useful outline of ethically questionable actions at different stages of research, such as applying for grants, collection of data, collaborations and publication. From an institutional perspective, the guideline provides a detailed roadmap on how to address breaches in scientific integrity, from the guiding principles to the practical aspects. +
These guidelines are essential for all researchers, especially those involved in interdisciplinary scientific projects. It covers both the underlying values of good research and good practices. +
Guidelines for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences, Humanities, Law and Theology (NESH, Norway) +
While the guidelines of the Norwegian Research Ethics Committees is the main national document, the NESH document provides an in-depth description of the ethical and legal bases of research, and the different domains where good practices are applicable. As opposed to the NREC guidelines, the NESH guidelines provide more practical norms that align with the values of research integrity. +
Guidelines for Safeguarding Good Research Practice distils national expectations for research integrity in Germany and clarifies what researchers and institutions in Germany need to do to comply. It reduces ambiguity, aligns local practice with international norms, and offers actionable steps that improve transparency, reproducibility, and equitable access. For policy leads, it is a benchmark; for authors and administrators, it is a practical checklist. Published by German Research Foundation in 2022, it is a credible reference to cite in institutional policies, training, and grant documentation. +
Ensuring that researchers are competent and versatile in their work will help them perform research of higher quality and enable them to build the skills necessary to deal with dilemmas and career uncertainty.
Research institutions can help foster research integrity and responsible research practices by providing researchers with healthy, collaborative, positive, inclusive, and enriching work environments. +
Publication pressure and competition can create an unhealthy research environment in which researchers might feel tempted to deviate from research integrity.
Research institutions can help foster research integrity and responsible research practices by providing researchers with healthy, collaborative, positive, inclusive, and enriching work environments. +
H
HEA Principles of Good Practice in Research within Irish Higher Education Institutions distils national expectations for research integrity in Ireland and clarifies what researchers and institutions in nan need to do to comply. It reduces ambiguity, aligns local practice with international norms, and offers actionable steps that improve transparency, reproducibility, and equitable access. For policy leads, it is a benchmark; for authors and administrators, it is a practical checklist. Published by nan in 2020, it is a credible reference to cite in institutional policies, training, and grant documentation. +
HEA Principles of Good Practice in Research within Irish Higher Education Institutions' is important because it ensures credibility and trust in research by providing both preventive and corrective guidance. It prevents misconduct by educating researchers on standards, and offers frameworks for addressing violations fairly. In today’s interconnected research environment, having shared ethical codes strengthens international collaboration and consistency. For governments, institutions, and the public, this document demonstrates commitment to transparency, fairness, and societal responsibility. It is not just a guideline but a foundation for safeguarding the reliability of research outcomes. +
Scientific dishonesty and misconduct in medical research may be detrimental in various ways, e.g. it may endanger the research subject’s well-being and the public trust in science. The severity and consequences of scientific misconduct depend on the form in which it takes place. Nonetheless, research shows that there is still a substantial number of researchers that have admitted to dishonest behaviour.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000004-QINU`"' Accordingly, prevention and punishment of both small and large instances of scientific dishonesty and misconduct are of utmost importance to ensure research integrity. The best institutions to issue these measures are independent committees that are free from personal and commercial biases. The present case may give insight into possible complications in the establishment of such committees, such as the definition of scientific misconduct. Therefore, it may aid in the formation and enhancement of systems to prevent scientific dishonesty and misconduct.
'"`UNIQ--references-00000005-QINU`"' +
Appropriately handling sexual harassment cases is extremely important. In addition, repercussions need to be taken when the accused is found guilty, and the victim(s) need to be protected, both personally and professionally. +
It shows the limitations of policies about financial conflict of interests and how discrepencies between national and institutional policies could contribute to confusion. It also shows what consequences may follow from a lack of transparency about the received funds. +
Scientific fraud can also be commited by persons who you would expect to commit fraud. +
Using herbicide resistant rice may seem beneficial at first but it is important to consider the consequences of the use of it. In this case six questions are posed which can be used to analyse the (bio)ethics and use of herbicide resistant crops. +
To prevent future research misconduct and unethical behaviour it is important to understand which factors make it possible for such practices to take place. In addition and as noted in the article, it is important to do justice not only to the victims of research misconduct but to all those involved, especially when the accused are deceased. When examining past cases of research misconduct it is important to keep in mind the ethical standards at the time the research was conducted, rather than applying our current ethical frameworks to the case. The analysis presented in this article contributes to our understanding of the various aspects of retrospective assessment of research misconduct cases. +
It highlights the ethical challenges of designing and conducting genetics research, telling a real life story where research results start to live their life of their own, and how results might be used in unintended ways. Research could be misconstrued or wielded to advance harmful agendas. The story presents a broader and more systematic view of how scientists should think about their research beyond simply following existing legal requirements. +
This case clearly demonstrates how researchers could be drawn into questionable practices involving commercial parties, and provides best practices for dealing with these situations. Professor Aspenberg is not embarrased to admit that he was nearly commiting a questionable practice and speaks out so that others would not repeat his mistake.
'"`UNIQ--references-00000091-QINU`"' +
Working in the laboratory can be challenging. Like in every other collective you are stuck with people that you like and do not like, colleagues that work and that are slacking, deadlines are always pressing down, equipment is damaged and you must stay professional.
A new study emphasizes the importance of encouraging positive workplace social relationships, particularly male-female friendships'"`UNIQ--ref-0000026B-QINU`"'. Thus, this theme helps us to induce all the virtues that one researcher must have to live a productive and fulfilled professional life.
'"`UNIQ--references-0000026C-QINU`"' +
The authors of this blog provide an analysis that raises several interesting points. These concern not only the ethics violations by the researcher but also the response from a number of bodies, not least the doctor's institution, the ORI (Office of Research Integrity) and the Office for Human Research Protection. +
