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
I
The document 'Code of Conduct for Research Integrity', developed in 2020 in Ireland, is a national guideline that addresses the principles of research integrity. Authored by The Royal Irish Academy, and available in English, it targets the research community in Ireland (but also researchers funded by Royal Irish Academy). 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. +
Maintaining high standards of Research Integrity (RI) is essential for excellence in research, as well as to maintain public trust in science. To this end, these recommendations from the Irish Council of Bioethics lay down the principles and key domains of Good Research Practice (GRP). While the principles correspond to those highlighted in the Irish National Policy Statement on RI, this document provides detailed explanations, with examples, of researchers' and institutions' rights and obligations, the teaching and learning of research integrity, and investigation of misconduct. +
Irish National Forum on Research Integrity's Guidelines for the Investigation of Misconduct in Research +
This document lays out he principles and procedure for investigating research misconduct in Irish institutions. It aligns with the National Policy Statement on ensuring Research Integrity in Ireland. +
Irish National Forum on Research Integrity's Position Paper on Research Integrity & Research Ethics +
This document, mainly intended for Research Ethics Committees (RECs), discusses the overlaps and the distinctions between the concepts of research ethics and research integrity, and delineates the extent of involvement of RECs in misconduct investigations procedures. +
Irish National Forum on Research Integrity's Report on Fostering a Climate of Excellence for Irish Research +
This report summarized the proceedings of the seminar on Research Integrity (RI) organized by the Irish National Forum on Research Integrity in 2017. It summarized the key responsibilities of the forum and the different sessions that cover national and international perspectives on RI, the importance of RI for research excellence and the teaching of RI. +
Irish National Forum on Research Integrity's Position Paper on Research Integrity Officer Role & Reporting +
This position paper of the Irish Nation Forum on Research Integrity describes the role of the Research Integrity Officer (RIO) or an equivalent person in the reporting, investigation and handling of cases of alleged misconduct. +
The aim of this statement is to commit the main organisations in Irish research to the highest standards of integrity in carrying out their research so that partners and other stakeholders, and the international research community may have full confidence in the Irish research system. +
In line with European and International Open Access initiatives, this document highlights Open access as a tenet of good research practice. Moreover, it confirms the researcher's freedom to publish their research output, ensures that publications are visible and supports the free flow of information in Ireland and worldwide. +
Irish Universities Quality Board's Good Practice for Institutional Research in Irish Higher Education +
This document elaborates good management, quality assurance and collaboration practices among Irish universities, in order to encourage and foster excellence in research and education. +
This article provides context and information about a case of suspected self-plagiarism that led to an investigation by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) in Canada. The investigation resulted in three retractions. +
This TED talk video presents some of the main causes of the so-called "reproducibility crisis", i.e. the innability to reproduce or replicate results that have been reported in peer-reviewed scientific publications, by other than the original writters researchers. +
This document is the Italian National Research Center (Centro Nazionale delle Ricerche) guidelines on research integrity (Linee guida per l'intergrita nella ricerca). A first version was published and updated in 2019. +
The National Research Council (CNR) is Italy's largest public research organization, which promotes excellence in research, collaboration and innovation. Performing and supporting research across seven disciplines, this organization also produces guidelines and position papers to guide affiliated research institutions and researchers. +
This is a factual case of a professor who had several of his publications retracted because of claims of plagiarism and faked affiliations. +
The paper highlight an often non recognized form plagiarism that occurs in multiauthored textbooks undergoing serial editions. The case presents a detailed description of this specific form of plagiarism. The cases study authors develop an ethical analysis from a wide stakeholder perspective of the production of textbooks. +
Dalmeet Singh Chawla from LSE questions the way forward for those committing violations of research ethics as well as the universities' responsibility for investigating such allegations. The author uses the case of a Canadian researcher whose medical license was reinstated. +
J
JST Policy on Open Access to Research Publications and Research Data Management (2017), Science Council of Japan +
The JST Policy on Open Access to Research Publications and Research Data Management (2017), issued by the Science Council of Japan, promotes open science by making openness the default while allowing exceptions for ethics, privacy, intellectual property, and security. It requires open access to publications via repositories with minimal embargoes, Creative Commons licences, and persistent identifiers, and encourages FAIR data practices supported by data management plans. The policy defines responsibilities for researchers, institutions, and funders, and stresses infrastructure such as repositories and discovery services to ensure compliance. Monitoring focuses on the quality of openness metadata, reproducibility, and data or code sharing rather than publication counts. Equity is emphasized through zero-embargo access, reduced costs for authors, and multilingual communication, while responsible openness is supported by safeguards for sensitive data and governance oversight. Overall, the policy provides practical guidance for Japan’s research community while aligning with international open science efforts. +
This is the factual case of a researcher who was caught manipulating calibrations in pre-clinical data;these manipulations resulted in making data appear safe for use in clinical trials when they might not have been. The researcher, who was working at an American pharmaceutical company based in Scotland, was jailed for 3 months as a result of the investigations. +
Investigations highlight need for a national, independent body to oversee research ethics. It has been a rough year for materials scientist Akihisa Inoue, the president of Tohoku University in Japan. Last March, an earthquake crippled his campus (see [https://doi.org/10.1038/483141a Nature 483,141–143;2012]). Since then, he has had to retract a series of papers because they contained text that had appeared in his previous publications, and has faced continuing calls for his resignation from the university, which he has rejected. His critics, mostly professors at his university, claim that some of his work cannot be replicated, and that there are irregularities in the data in some of his papers (see [https://doi.org/10.1038/470446a Nature 470, 446–447;2011]). +
This factual case describes the story of a teenage boy who died during a clinical trial in which a gene therapy for a rare metabolic disorder was tested. The story is told in great detail from the perspective of the boy's father. Following his son's death, he discovered that the researchers leading the trial had conflicts of interest and that he and his son were not properly informed of the risks of the trial. +
