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
S
The SHERPA Final Recommendations are important because they move beyond abstract ethical principles and offer concrete, actionable guidance for shaping AI in a way that protects fundamental rights and societal values. As AI systems increasingly influence decision-making in areas such as healthcare, employment, security, and governance, unmanaged ethical risks such as discrimination, lack of transparency, and power imbalances can undermine trust and social cohesion. By promoting clear concepts, shared knowledge, and effective governance, the recommendations help align technological innovation with European values, including human dignity, democracy, and the rule of law. They also support policy coherence across EU Member States, reduce regulatory fragmentation, and provide practical tools for policymakers, researchers, and organizations to implement responsible and trustworthy AI. +
SOPs4RI - Guidelines for research institutions on community building for a positive research culture +
Ensuring that researchers work in an environment that is collaborative, positive, inclusive, and enriching is a starting point to enable responsible research practices and 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. +
Upholding a diverse and inclusive environment is key to allowing researchers, research staff, and research students to feel safe and to feel part of their research community.
Research institutions can help foster research integrity and responsible research practices by providing researchers with healthy, collaborative, positive, inclusive, and enriching work environments. +
Research institutions, supervisors, and mentors have an important role when it comes to research integrity. Responsible supervision and mentorship is necessary to ensure responsible socialization of supervisees into research, as well as to foster responsible research practices. Supervisors and mentors can benefit from support from their research institutions in providing responsible supervision and mentorship. This guideline presents a set of recommendations to research institutions on improving their institutional supervision structures and giving support to supervisors in developing their supervision skills. The guideline consists of recommendations on improving institutional support structures for supervisors, providing supervisors with necessary knowledge, training and support, and rewarding supervision in the evaluation and assessment of researchers. The guideline provides information relevant for research officers, trainers, managers, and coordinators, as well as deans, rectors and other institutional leaders +
This guideline presents a set of recommendations to research institutions on the guidance and resources to give to research leaders, in order to support them in building and leading an effective research group.
Leaders of research teams are responsible for a multitude of roles, including administration, management, allocation of financial resources and lab infrastructure, mentoring and guiding or inspiring young scientists to achieve their full potential. Research leaders can benefit from support from their research institutions to achieve their full potential as responsible leaders. This guideline presents a set of recommendations to research institutions on the guidance and resources to give to research leaders, in order to support them in building and leading an effective research group. The guideline consists of recommendations on improving institutional support structures for leaders, providing leaders with necessary guidance, knowledge, training and support, and rewarding responsible leadership in the evaluation and assessment of researchers. The guideline provides information relevant for research officers, trainers, managers, and coordinators, as well as deans, rectors and other institutional leaders. +
SOPs4RI Guidelines for research funders on defining and preventing unjustified interferences from funders, political and commercial actors +
Independence and the avoidance of unjustifiable interference are key considerations to address in creating a Research Integrity Promotion Plan for research funders. Independence and transparency in the research and funding process are ultimately about the integrity and trustworthiness of research outputs and are, therefore, vital for the research funder to uphold and protect. This guideline provides key recommendations to guide and empower research funders as they work to develop or enhance their own governance frameworks and Research Integrity Promotion Plans. The guideline concerns unjustifiable interferences, by which we mean any financial, professional, or other interests of any stakeholder involved, that might negatively influence a decision or be affected by the outcome of a decision. The recommendations in this guideline concern what measures research funding organizations can take to define unjustified interferences, ensuring transparency and integrity in their procedures, and preventing unjustified interferences by funders themselves, political, and commercial actors. The guideline was designed to provide inspiration and best practice examples on areas that may be considered when setting up Research Integrity Promotion Plans. The guideline should not be seen as a ‘one-size-fits-all’, but rather as a tool that can be used flexibly and adapted to meet users’ specific needs. +
The guidelines on monitoring of funded projects address research funding organizations with the aim to give them general recommendations on how to monitor the execution of research grants with regards to scientific, research integrity and financial aspects. Most research funding organizations already have policies on monitoring funded projects;however, these guidelines can serve as inspiration to help research funders develop internal guidelines about the entire monitoring process, as well as external guidelines to inform beneficiaries of funders’ expectations towards them. The monitoring process can help research funders and governmental institutions to think about the structural problems that make compliance difficult for the beneficiaries. These guidelines were designed to provide inspiration and best practice examples on areas that may be considered when setting up Research Integrity Promotion Plans. The guidelines should not be seen as a ‘one-size-fits-all’, but rather as tools that can be used flexibly and adapted to meet users’ specific needs. +
These guidelines address research funding organizations with the aim to give them general recommendations on how to responsibly select and evaluate proposals. They address how to tackle research integrity, methodological, and diversity and inclusion considerations during the funding proposal selection and evaluation process. While research funders already have established procedures for selecting and evaluating proposals, these guidelines can serve as inspiration to help research funders develop internal procedures that specifically address research integrity and quality considerations in their selection and evaluation process. The guidelines can also help funders develop external guidelines to inform beneficiaries of their expectations towards them. Consideration of research integrity and quality in funders’ grant selection and evaluation process plays a crucial role in incentivizing responsible research, and thereby fostering research integrity. These guidelines were designed to provide inspiration and best practice examples on areas that may be considered when setting up Research Integrity Promotion Plans. The guidelines should not be seen as a ‘one-size-fits-all’, but rather as tools that can be used flexibly and adapted to meet users’ specific needs. +
SOPs4RI Guidelines for research institutions on Responsible Supervision and Leadership - Supervision requirements & guidelines +
Research institutions, supervisors, and mentors have an important role when it comes to research integrity. Responsible supervision and mentorship is necessary to ensure responsible socialization of supervisees into research, as well as to foster responsible research practices. Supervisors and mentors can benefit from support from their research institutions in providing responsible supervision and mentorship. This guideline presents a set of recommendations to research institutions on improving their institutional supervision structures and giving support to supervisors in developing their supervision skills. The guideline consists of recommendations on improving institutional support structures for supervisors, providing supervisors with necessary knowledge, training and support, and rewarding supervision in the evaluation and assessment of researchers. The guideline provides information relevant for research officers, trainers, managers, and coordinators, as well as deans, rectors and other institutional leaders +
Education is needed to raise awareness about research integrity and provide researchers with the required tools to promote responsible research practices. Training is an important aspect of research integrity education, but continuous research integrity education also requires informal approaches. These include teaching and learning about research integrity through responsible supervision, socialization in a responsible research environment, as well as learning by doing. +
SOPs4RI Guidelines for research institutions on the research integrity education of bachelor, master and PhD students +
Education and training are needed to raise awareness about research integrity and provide researchers with the required tools to promote responsible research practices.
Research integrity education offered to bachelor, master and PhD students ensures that students learn about responsible research practices at the start of their research trajectory. +
SOPs4RI Guidelines for research institutions on the research integrity education of institutional research integrity stakeholders +
Education and training are needed to raise awareness about research integrity and provide stakeholders with the required tools to promote responsible research practices.
Not only researchers, but also other research integrity stakeholder can benefit from research integrity education. Research integrity education can equip various research integrity stakeholders to adequately support researchers in engaging in responsible research practices. +
SOPs4RI Guidelines for research institutions on the research integrity education of post-doctorate and senior researchers +
Education and training are needed to raise awareness about research integrity and provide researchers with the required tools to promote responsible research practices.
Research integrity education offered to post-doctorate and senior researchers ensures awareness about research integrity among researchers across seniority levels, and helps researchers to stay up to date with the latest developments. +
Research institutions, supervisors, and mentors have an important role when it comes to research integrity. Responsible supervision and mentorship is necessary to ensure responsible socialization of supervisees into research, as well as to foster responsible research practices. The relationship between students and supervisors requires respect, openness, and accountability from both sides. PhD students, in particular, need support from their research institutions in engaging in this relationship. This guideline presents a set of recommendations for research institutions on informing and empowering PhD students regarding their rights, roles and responsibilities. The guideline provides information relevant for research officers, trainers, managers, and coordinators, as well as deans, rectors and other institutional leaders. +
*This course offers researchers an especialised training to improve their skills as supervisors.
*This training can improve academic leadership and empowerment of supervisors.
*Supervisors have an important role in teaching RCR to their supervisees.
+
This article and the discussed case highlight the importance of a concise and comprehensive definition of research misconduct in order to assure a proper handling of respective accusations. The case described may be seen exemplary of the implications a definition of research misconduct may have. +
Safeguards, Data-sharing and the Disclosure of Sensitive Results: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project +
The scenarios are designed to help researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators to become better acquainted with [https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/hi/h2020-ethics_code-of-conduct_en.pdf The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity] ('ECCRI' or 'ECoC') as a regulatory document that articulates the standards of good research practice.
They also allow users to reflect on and apply their own national and institutional research ethics and research integrity codes as well as other key regulatory documents and guidelines.
The goal is for the user to gain knowledge of the standards associated with good research practices and to make sense of these standards in different research contexts.
According to the ECCRI/ECoC, there are eight categories of research contexts that are covered by the standards of good research practice:
1) Research Environment
2) Training, Supervision and Mentoring
3) Research Procedures
4) [https://zenodo.org/record/4063633#.X3cGu5NKjxQ '''Safeguards''']
5) Data Practices and Management
6) Collaborative Working
7) Publication and Dissemination
8) Reviewing, Evaluating and Editing +
This editorial highlights that the lack of an official national body responsible for addressing issues of scientific misconduct contributes to an inefficient and disorganised workflow in dealing with cases of misconduct. +
Statement: Code of Conduct for Scientists–Revised Version' 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. +
Science Ethics Code of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences distils national expectations for research integrity in Hungary 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 Hungarian Academy of Sciences in 2010, it is a credible reference to cite in institutional policies, training, and grant documentation. +
