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
N
The Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2018) is important because it establishes a shared national standard for responsible, honest, and transparent research across all disciplines and institutions. It defines core principles honesty, scrupulousness, transparency, independence, and responsibility that guide researchers in conducting, reporting, and evaluating research. The Code helps prevent research misconduct and questionable research practices by clarifying expectations and responsibilities. It also provides a common framework for handling integrity breaches, ensuring fairness, due process, and consistency across Dutch universities and research organisations. Furthermore, the Code strengthens public trust in science, which is essential for societal support, policy relevance, and funding. By aligning with international research integrity standards, it also enhances the credibility and global reputation of Dutch research, supporting high-quality collaboration and responsible research assessment. +
The code is relevant for all researchers in the Netherlands as it is the central national guiding document on research integrity. +
The Dutch Code of Conduct for Research Integrity describes the institutional duties of care, including creating a working environment that promotes and safeguards good research practices. The periodic research evaluation assesses whether the institution fulfills this duty sufficiently. +
New Zealand Code of Professional Standards and Ethics in Science, Technology, and the Humanities (2019) +
Code of Professional Standards and Ethics in Science, Technology, and the Humanities ' 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. +
By recognizing these pitfalls and responding appropriately can save a career and strengthen science. +
The Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees developed these general guidelines as a gateway document to research ethics. Further specification is expected for discipline specific research. Indeed, the Committees have developed additional guidelines for medical and health research, science and technology, and social sciences, humanities, law and theology'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"'.
'"`UNIQ--references-00000001-QINU`"' +
It shows that some researchers might successfully hide their conflicting interests for years without funding agencies and journals realising that. +
O
These infographics can be used by RCR instructors and Research Integrity Officers (RIOs) to help educate the community on research integrity topics. ORI encourages the sharing and distribution of these resources with colleagues. +
The blog brings up the question of how equivalent are punishments for seemingly similar ethics violations among different researchers and how these are decided upon. +
OeAWI Guidelines for Good Scientific Practice distils national expectations for research integrity in Austria 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 2018, it is a credible reference to cite in institutional policies, training, and grant documentation. +
Office of the Principal Scientific Adviser to the Government of India National Policy on Academic Ethics (2024) +
National Policy on Academic Ethics' 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. +
Safeguards are usually thought of an ethics issue that mainly concerns the research participants rather than the researchers themselves. In this case, this notion is challenged and both the researcher and the researched are susceptible to safeguarding issues. Also, this is a good case for discussions on research methods courses on ethnography or with ethnographic elements. +
Reviews often serve as an important source of evidence in informing policy and practice. This factual case is a very interesting starting point for debate (universities, students, researchers, policy makers) on how to approach reviews and conclusions based on research that has been, for various reasons, retracted. +
The university that considered the complaint did not consider the matter to fall within the scope of a violation of research integrity nor did it consider the guidelines for responsible conduct of research to cover internet comments made by an employee during their spare time.
According to the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity ('TENK'), the internet comments put the limits of its guidelines for responsible conduct of research to the test. It deemed that the lecturer in technology had showed irresponsible behaviour by inappropriately hampering the work of another researcher. However, this was not enough to consider the act as a violation of research integrity. +
Problem-based learning can be a helpful educational tool to learn about complex issues. Additionally, the book uses case scenarios to make the course interactive, stimulate discussion and have a low threshold to engage in conversations about the topics at hand.
<br />
== Chapters ==
# The ethical basis of RCRH
# Research in humans
# Ethics and study design
# Conflicts of interest (COI)
# Monitoring research
# International clinical research
# Genetics and stem cell research
# Malfeasance and misconduct +
The CAS assumes the responsibility of uploading electronic versions of research output on a digital repository, and ensures that it is made available to the public. Publication embargoes that are contractually required by journals will be respected. Different forms of research output such as articles, teaching material, book chapters and presentations are covered by this policy. +
Fake peer-reviewing allows researchers to circumvent the scientific journal review system that is in place to ensure the quality of the publication. Serious consequences may follow if this quality control step is skipped. For instance, the meta-analysis, in this case, claims the opposite of the widely considered beliefs about the treatment in question. If clinicians base their treatments based on such a meta-analysis, substantial harm to patients could be done. Therefore, it is important to recognize certain red flags for fake peer reviews in the peer review system. '"`UNIQ--ref-00000002-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-00000003-QINU`"' +
This training program aims to train trainers to conduct a virtue-based research integrity training. It is composed of online and offline components which are designed to allow for flexibility. The program aims to (further) develop knowledge about relevant concepts of research integrity and to promote the development of didactical skills necessary to foster reflection about motivations to engage in good research practices among trainers in training. The program aims to: 1) promote the development of didactical skills necessary to foster virtue-based reflection about motivations to engage in good research practices among trainees and 2) support and reflect on the adoption of didactical approaches suitable for their work context. Trainers are encouraged to adapt materials in order to make them more suitable for the context in which they will offer their training. This supports contextualised teaching across different countries and disciplines and promotes the internalisation of the practices and principles of the ECoC. +
AD’ye ilişkin çeşitli davranış kodları ya da kılavuzlara göre, araştırmacıların “dürüstlük”, “güvenilirlik”, “sorumluluk” ve “hesap verebilirlik” gibi belirli erdemleri haiz olması ve bu erdemlere uygun biçimde davranması beklenmektedir. Peki, mesela “dürüstlük” erdeminin hakkını verecek davranış nedir? Benim bir araştırmacı olarak gereğinden fazla dürüst olmam ya da çok az dürüst olmam diye bir şey mümkün müdür? Bu alıştırmanın amacı, araştırma doğruluğu ile ilgili çetrefilli bir durumda erdemli davranış sergilemenin ne anlama geldiğine ilişkin eleştirel ve müşterek bir sorgulamayı teşvik etmektir. +
AD’ye ilişkin çeşitli davranış kodları ya da kılavuzlarda, araştırmacıların “dürüstlük”, “güvenilirlik”, “sorumluluk” ve “hesap verebilirlik” gibi belirli erdemleri haiz olması ve bu erdemlere uygun biçimde davranması beklenmektedir.<sup>[1]</sup> Bu erdemler, araştırmacılara, araştırma doğruluğu ile ilgili ahlaki sorunlarla karşılaştıklarında doğruluk içinde hareket etmeleri konusunda rehberlik etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Peki, mesela “dürüstlük” erdeminin hakkını en iyi verecek davranış nedir? Dahası, bir araştırmacının gereğinden fazla dürüst olması ya da çok az dürüst olması diye bir şey mümkün müdür? Dürüstlük örneği üzerinden gidilecek olursa: belirli bir kişi için belirli bir bağlamda, dürüst olmanın doğru yolu nedir?
Bu alıştırmanın amacı, bir eğitmen olarak sizi, katılımcılarınızın erdemli davranış sergilemenin ne anlama geldiğine ilişkin eleştirel ve müşterek bir sorgulama yürütmesine yardımcı olabilmeniz için eğitmektir. +
