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
Guide to Recommendations for Responsible Practices -2013 (2013) is a national framework authored by Brazilian Academy of Sciences, in portuguese, targeting Brazil. Originating from Brazil, 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.
Set of questions to guide the conversation about about work-related stress and about stress influencing work.
The guide addresses the following themes:
# Work-related stress
# Work-life balance
# Atmosphere at work
# Evaluation & agreements +
Guidelines 03/2020 on the processing of data concerning health for the purpose of scientific research in the context of the COVID-19 outbreak +
This guidance is intended for the processing of health data for the purpose of scientific research. It provides information on legal basis for the processing of data, data protection principles, exercise of the rights of data subjects, and international data transfers for scientific research purposes. +
These Guidelines were presented by the Lithuanian Ombudsperson for Academic Ethics and Procedures in 2020 (revised 2022), and were developed to ensure the compliance of the Lithuanian academic community with european and global research ethics standards. The principles of academic integrity established here aim to protect the interests of research participants and animals used for research. The guidelines establish complaince with ethical procedures as a marker of research quality, and offer guidance for coping with the challenges and problems of research reliability, integrity, and comprehensiveness, as well as with management of collected data. +
These guidelines aim to help departments and faculty members implement evaluation procedures in hiring, tenure and promotion. They are intended for scholars dealing with digital media as their subject as well as for those who use digital methods in their work. +
The FNRS (Funds for Scientific Research) is a research funding organization that has focused on encouraging fundamental research in Belgium for more than 90 years. In order to enable universities to perform research within a clear framework of scientific integrity, this guideline was developed. It also aims to lay out procedures for addressing scientific misconduct, and to create awareness or research integrity among individual researchers. +
The Norwegian National Committee for Research Ethics in Science and Technology (NENT) is a member organization of the Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees. As an independent advisory body, it provides important guidelines that lay down the standards of good scientific practice. +
Guidelines for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences, Humanities, Law and Theology (NESH, Norway) +
The National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH) is one of the constituents of the Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees. As such, it forms an impartial advisory body on research ethics and integrity. In this document, the NESH sets out the good research practices that are especially relevant to researchers within the social sciences and humanities, but also to the research community at large. +
This is an educational course intended for new researchers. The aim of the course is to educate them on conducting responsible data management. It contains best practice guidelines, various learning features and resources. +
Guidelines for Safeguarding Good Research Practice (2022) is a national framework authored by German Research Foundation, in german and english, targeting Germany. Originating from Germany, 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.
These guidelines are designed to assist in the development or revision of the consent process for use in clinical trials involving human participants. These guidelines do not address issues related to informed consent in clinical practice.
The guidelines have been developed by the i-CONSENT consortium. i-CONSENT (H2020, Grant Agreement number 741856) is an EU-funded H2020 project that aims to improve the information that individuals receive when deciding whether or not to participate in clinical trials. +
This [https://osf.io/2p3vf guideline] offers recommendations that can help research institutions provide researchers with adequate education and skills building opportunities. +
This [https://osf.io/tracp guideline] offers recommendations that can help research institutions manage the competition between researchers and the publication pressure they face. +
This short guide recommends researchers how to communicate with the media in order to prevent potential misrepresentations. +
Guidelines on Open Access to Scientific Publications and Data (2016), Research Council of Lithuania +
Guidelines on Open Access to Scientific Publications and Data (2016), produced by the Research Council of Lithuania, outlines national expectations for open science and open access. Written in Lithuanian, it provides guidance for researchers, institutions, funders, and publishers. The guidelines promote openness as the default, balanced with ethics, privacy, intellectual property, and security. Key elements include open access to publications, FAIR data principles, persistent identifiers, and deposition in trusted repositories. Responsibilities are defined for authors and institutions, covering rights retention, funding acknowledgement, and cost management. Embargoes and exceptions for sensitive data are transparently documented. The document encourages enabling infrastructure, training, and monitoring, aligning local practice with international standards like Plan S. Equity, responsible openness, and inclusion are cross-cutting themes. For practitioners, it serves as a practical checklist to improve transparency, reproducibility, and equitable access. Published in 2016, it is a credible reference for implementing open research in Lithuania. +
Guidelines to the Rules on Open Access to Scientific Publications & Open Access to Research Data in Horizon 2020 (2017), European Comission +
Guidelines to the Rules on Open Access to Scientific Publications & Open Access to Research Data in Horizon 2020 (2017), produced by the European Commission, is an international policy resource written in English and designed for stakeholders across Europe and beyond. It sets openness as the default for research, while balancing ethical, privacy, intellectual property, and security considerations under the maxim “as open as possible, as closed as necessary.” The guidelines link openness to improved research quality, reproducibility, translation speed, and equitable knowledge access, particularly for under-resourced communities. They outline requirements for open access to publications, Creative Commons licensing, persistent identifiers, and deposition in trusted repositories, while also promoting FAIR data principles and detailed data management plans. Responsibilities are assigned to researchers and institutions, including rights retention, funding acknowledgement, and justified use of embargoes. Infrastructure such as repositories, registries, and discovery systems supports compliance, while monitoring occurs through grant reporting and progress indicators. The resource emphasizes responsible openness with safeguards for sensitive or commercial data and encourages capacity building, multilingual communication, and equity. It aligns European practices with initiatives like Plan S and the European Open Science Cloud. For researchers, managers, librarians, funders, and publishers, it offers a clear, actionable reference, reducing ambiguity, harmonizing practices internationally, and serving as a benchmark for transparency, reproducibility, and open research. Published in 2017, it remains a credible reference for policy, training, and grant compliance. +
H
HEA Principles of Good Practice in Research within Irish Higher Education Institutions (2020) is a national framework authored by nan, in english, targeting nan. Originating from Ireland, 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.
The document 'HEA Principles of Good Practice in Research within Irish Higher Education Institutions', developed in 2020 in Ireland, is a national guideline that addresses the principles of research integrity. Authored by Higher Educaton Authority, and available in English, it targets the research community in Ireland. It provides clear expectations for responsible conduct in research and defines practices that safeguard honesty, transparency, and accountability. The text outlines responsibilities of both individual researchers and institutions. It identifies misconduct such as plagiarism, data falsification, fabrication, and unethical authorship, while also promoting good practices in publication, peer review, and collaborative research. It emphasizes effective data management, openness in reporting, and respect for colleagues, participants, and the wider community. Institutions are encouraged to create supportive environments through policies, training, and oversight mechanisms. The document serves as an official reference for aligning national research standards with international expectations, reinforcing ethical norms across research fields. +
This research initiative addresses research integrity. It emphasizes that grey zones and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) play an important role in research integrity. +
HEIRRI is a Horizon 2020 project that created training programmes for Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). There are ten HEIRRI training programmes in total, for high school level, undergraduate and graduate students, PhD students, and a train-the-trainer course. They can be used independently and allow great teacher flexibilty. +
