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
I
It is crucial for participants to complete the eLearning modules in advance of the face-to-face training in order to acquire a shared understanding of the program’s core concepts. +
Supervision, mentoring, and role-modeling have a strong influence on research work environments. If a research environment is not open or is unsafe, researchers are less likely to raise concerns or admit mistakes. Therefore, contributing to an open, safe and responsible research environment is important to reduce problems such as poor mental health, drop-outs, fraudulent practices, discrimination, and harassment. For this reason, responsible and good supervision, and mentoring might be seen as duties of care to reduce and signal problems. +
Supervision, mentoring, and role-modeling have a strong influence on research work environments. If a research environment is not open or is unsafe, researchers are less likely to raise concerns or admit mistakes. Therefore, contributing to an open, safe and responsible research environment is important to reduce problems such as poor mental health, drop-outs, fraudulent practices, discrimination, and harassment. For this reason, responsible and good supervision, and mentoring might be seen as duties of care to reduce and signal problems. +
Teaching research ethics and research integrity is incredibly important for several key reasons including fostering important skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and effective communication.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000015-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-00000016-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-00000017-QINU`"' These skills are valuable not only for researchers but also for individuals in various professions and aspects of life.
'"`UNIQ--references-00000018-QINU`"' +
Teaching research ethics and research integrity is important for several key reasons including fostering skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and effective communication.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000000C-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-0000000D-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-0000000E-QINU`"' These skills are valuable not only for researchers but also for individuals in various professions and aspects of life.
'"`UNIQ--references-0000000F-QINU`"' +
Introduction to the evaluation of the effectiveness of Research Ethics and Integrity (REI) training +
We may even argue that it is unethical to provide poor quality training. Thus, it is imperative to provide training that benefits both researchers and institutions and contributes to building the culture of integrity. +
Code of Conduct for Research Integrity' 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. +
Irish National Forum on Research Integrity's Guidelines for the Investigation of Misconduct in Research +
While the Irish National Policy Statement on Research Integrity lays down the principles of research, good research practices and also the principles underlying response to research misconduct, this guideline gives more detailed advice to carry out a formal investigation. For instance, it lays out guidelines for the investigative panel composition, the review procedure, and how to maintain confidentiality. +
Irish National Forum on Research Integrity's Position Paper on Research Integrity & Research Ethics +
The definitions of research integrity and research ethics vary across sources. This is of practical importance, as it affects the extent to which RECs should be involved in investigating breaches of research integrity. This document shed light on this issue by discussing the different international and European definitions of RI and RE. Finally, based on the OECD code of practice for research, it concludes that RECs shoul dnot take full responsibility for research misconduct handling. +
Irish National Forum on Research Integrity's Position Paper on Research Integrity Officer Role & Reporting +
This document is important for RIOs and research institutions, as it describes the extent and limits of the RIO's responsibilities. +
The Irish Universities Association and its member institutions have long been committed to the highest standards of research conduct and integrity, and individual institutions have procedures in place to underpin this. Similar commitments to upholding integrity have been made by IoTI and its members, and by DIT and other organisations. However, the transparency of policy and practice will be enhanced by publication of a national statement which clarifies policy and sets out agreed good practice in promoting and ensuring research integrity. This commitment is shared by the universities, IoTI, DIT, Teagasc, RCSI and the main Irish research funding agencies;in particular, the Health Research Board, Science Foundation Ireland, Enterprise Ireland, the Higher Education Authority and the Royal Irish Academy. +
Irish Universities Quality Board's Good Practice for Institutional Research in Irish Higher Education +
Good institutional management and policy are essential for high-quality research. To foster better co-operation and standardization of research policy among the seven Irish universities, the Irish Universities Quality Board sets detailed guidelines for management of every step of the research process, from planning to results. +
Professor Smith is described by his colleagues as "a very good scientist" but nontheless, he has recycled text from his previous work without acknowledgement. +
It gives the correct perspective for looking at research that is not reproducible. If we set aside the deliberate maniplation of research data, irreproducibility can stem from sloppy planning or conducting of research or from an honest mistake that has been prodiced by the mere complexity of an experiment. In other words, reliable research needs extremely cautious and honest researchers. +
This document describes the research integrity framework for National Research Center institutes. +
This Web page provides an overview of the guidelines and position Papers of the CNR which address specific areas, such as:
- Code of Ethics and Deontology for Scientific Activity in the field of Cultural Heritage
- Increasing Risks of Predatory Publishing: Recommendations for Researchers
- Incidental Findings in scientific research: Criteria and Recommendations for -Omics Sciences
- Informed Consent in Scientific Research: Ethical Toolkit
- Ethical Charter on Social Sciences and Humanities Research
-Child Protection Policy and Code of Conduct. +
There is an interesting discussion about definitions of research misconduct, responsibilities of different bodies and suggestions for ways forward. +
J
The most usual outcome of investigations concerning data falsification is the retraction of a paper[[:File:///D:/ENTIRE/cases/Case description/Description of cases draft1.docx#%20ftn1|[1]]]. The present case presents an unusual example of a conviction given to an individual researcher for scientific research misconduct, and the first case of this type in the UK.
Falsification of data in pharmaceutical research might have a number of serious negative consequences such as compromising the safety of drug trials with humans and, potentially, presenting a danger to public health. Moreover, it can undermine the public’s trust to the outcomes of such trials and to scientific research in general.
----[[:File:///D:/ENTIRE/cases/Case description/Description of cases draft1.docx#%20ftnref1|[1]]] [[Theme:047c3bec-1747-499b-b6d5-684cbfb81edd#cite%20note-1|https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:047c3bec-1747-499b-b6d5-684cbfb81edd#cite_note-1]] +
Participants of clinical trials must be well informed of the risks they are taking by participating in the trial, especially when the treatment under investigation is a non-therapeutic intervention. In these cases, the benefits should outweigh the risks, which was not true in the tragedy described here: adverse effects were reported in previous cases, whilst no efficacy of the gene therapy was observed in humans. As noted in the article, the trial most likely progressed regardless of these risks due to the principal investigator's conflicts of interest and faults by the responsible regulatory institutions. Therefore, this case is a prime example of how conflicts of interest may seriously harm the health of patients and trial participants. To prevent unnecessary deaths in the future, it is important to keep these stories in our collective memory and learn lessons from them. The detailed account presented here may help us do just that. +
Joint Guidelines on the Interplay between the Digital Markets Act and the General Data Protection Regulation +
The guidelines matter because they address a real legal gap: large digital platforms must comply with both competition-focused DMA rules and privacy-focused GDPR rules, but without clear guidance there can be confusion or even conflicting interpretations. These joint guidelines help ensure that organisations know how to apply both regimes in ways that protect individual rights under the GDPR while meeting DMA competition obligations. This boosts legal clarity, compliance certainty, and enforcement coherence across EU law especially for “gatekeepers” whose data practices directly affect consumers, businesses, and markets. +
