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
G
This new, re-worked edition of the Swedish Research Council’s publication "Good Research Practice" was reseased in october 2024. It is based on the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ALLEA) and aims to promote an ethical mindset. It provides orientation in ethical principles and regulations that are important for research, and clarifies responsibilities of different actors. It contains examples of questions that researchers should ask in relation to their own research area and provides guidance for reflection on ethics throughout the research process. +
This new, re-worked edition of the Swedish Research Council’s publication "Good Research Practice" was reseased in october 2024 (and replaces the previous version from 2017). It is based on the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ALLEA) and aims to promote an ethical mindset. It provides orientation in ethical principles and regulations that are important for research, and clarifies responsibilities of different actors. It contains examples of questions that researchers should ask in relation to their own research area and provides guidance for reflection on ethics throughout the research process. +
Good Scientific Research Practice (2004), Ministry of Science and Information Society Technologies (63 RI Good scientific research practice - Poland, p. 1) +
Good Scientific Research Practice (2004) is a national framework authored by Ministry of Science and Information Society Technologies (63 RI Good scientific research practice - Poland, p. 1), in english, targeting nan. Originating from Poland, 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.
Good research practice (2017) is a national framework authored by nan, in english, targeting Sweden. Originating from Sweden, 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.
Good scientific practice for courses in science and medicine: report;german +
The Spanish Superior Council for Scientific Investigation (CSIC), besides publishing general good conduct guidelines, has set forth detailed guidelines pertaining to the publication and dissemination of scientific research results. These are relevant to researchers and research institutions in Spain. +
In 2010, Harvard University psychologist Marc Hauser seemed to be at the pinnacle of his career. His provocative work probing the biological origins of cognition and morality had yielded collaborations with prominent scholars, as well as frequent media attention. And with the recent publication of a popular book on moral cognition, he had moved into the rarified sphere of the public intellectual. Then a Harvard investigation concluded that the author of ''Moral Minds: How Nature Designed Our Universal Sense of Right and Wrong'' had engaged in scientific misconduct. Last week, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Research Integrity (ORI) confirmed the findings, revealing that Hauser fabricated and falsified methods and data in six federally funded studies. +
Greek Cypriot students’ ideas of historical empathy: a case study exploration of 9 -12 years old students’ ideas about practices in the past +
This dissertation reports a case study conducted on Greek Cypriot primary students. The aim was to explore their ideas of historical empathy. Students were asked about two practices in the past: child labour in early 20th century Cyprus and boys’ education in Ancient Sparta. The study shows that the students hold similar ideas of historical empathy to those identified by international research. +
The world is facing several pressing environmental issues such as climate change and air pollution that need to be urgently addressed. As lab managers, researchers, innovators, and students, our work aims to solve these environmental challenges. Ironically, many scientific labs consume excessive energy, generate significant material waste, and rely on unsustainable equipment, substantially increasing their carbon footprints. However, the good news is that simple, practical actions can make a big difference. What could these practical actions be?
This micromodule is designed to equip learners with the knowledge and tools needed to make labs more environmentally friendly, thereby contributing to a Green Transition. Through real-world examples and a case study showcasing eco-friendly lab management practices, this micromodule will foster learning and critical reflection on how greening strategies can be tailored to specific contexts and scale up for a broader outreach. +
This episode of SEI’s Now & Then podcast explores climate justice, green colonialism and just transitions, and what that means for Indigenous peoples in Northern Europe. +
There are two complementary approaches through which technology can contribute to sustainability:
• Greening by Tech: using technology to enable sustainable solutions (e.g., climate monitoring, carbon tracking, energy-efficient transportation).
• Greening of Tech: making the technologies themselves — including software, cloud, and hardware — more sustainable and energy-efficient.
Read pages 16 to 18 of the UN Responsible Technology Playbook, linked in the first slide of this course (www.thoughtworks.com/content/dam/thoughtworks/documents/e-book/tw_ebook_responsible_tech_playbook_united_nations.pdf), which explain these two concepts and sustainability design principles. Then complete the two exercises. +
This resource describes 10 scenarios which can be discussed with students. The cases are all about plagiarism, and consider different aspects related to plagiarism, copying ideas, working together and citations. The resource presents the scenarios accompanied with questions students can discuss, and relevant teacher notes.
<br /> +
This article in ''Nature'' covers a series of apparent plagiarism cases in papers co-authored by government ministers and senior officials in Iran. According to the journal, these cases raise questions about whether such incidents are symptomatic of professional conditions also common in other developing countries or whether they are specifically linked to the Iranian regime and its politically-motivated and nepotistic appointments. +
The purpose of the third exercise is for participants to easily gain an overall understanding of the differences between the two types of innovation. +
This factual case discusses various accusations of scientific misconduct, most notably the practices of guest authorship and ghostwriting. The case begins with various letters to the authors of an article on guest authorship and the editors of the journal, following which both the editors and the authors respond to these letters.
'"`UNIQ--references-00000000-QINU`"' +
This post provides several factual examples of 'purchased author credentials' in published papers. Abalkina argues that ‘bought authorship' has flourished partly due to the increased pressure to Russian academics to publish. However, it has expanded to other European and non-countries. +
This document offers advices on conducting ethical Internet research. It addresses questions such as privacy, vulnerability, potential harm, informed consent, confidentiality, consultation, platform/community knowledge and data acquisition. +
This guidance, developed by the PREPARED project, supports ethics committees and journal editors in conducting fair and rapid assessments of research during public health emergencies. It offers practical recommendations to ensure evaluations remain ethical, transparent, and scientifically sound, even under time and resource pressure. The document emphasizes involving qualified assessors, using standardized checklists, and focusing on key ethical and safety issues. It also encourages minimizing bias, promoting consistency, and improving coordination among journals, ethics boards, and funders. By streamlining reviews without compromising standards, the guidance enables timely, trustworthy research dissemination while protecting participants and upholding public trust. +
The document is the result of participant discussions during the 5th meeting of the ETHICS AND RESEARCH INTEGRITY OFFICER NETWORK (ERION) within the European Association of Research Managers and Administrators (EARMA).
The theme of the meeting was ‘Implementation of training programmes for researchers in Ethics and Research Integrity’. Participants discussed in small groups best practices and key elements for the implementation of training programmes for researchers in Ethics and Research Integrity.
ERION is an open community to discuss the practical and implementation side of Research Ethics and Integrity. The community is for all those that need to ensure compliance, efficiency, functionality, fairness and robustness in the practices and processes in their organisation. Such people may have titles as Ethics/Integrity Officer, Administrator and many others. +
Guidance for all stakeholders involved in clinical trials during the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe. This document aims to provide guidance and prevent the disruption of clinical trials during the ongoing crisis. Even when health systems reach their limits, the integrity of trials, the rights, and the safety of the trial participants and staff must be preserved and protected. For this reason, this guideline provides harmonized, simplified and pragmatic measures. +
