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
P
This case is about a philosophy professor at the University of Leuven, who had 14 retractions. One of the plagiarised articles was spotted by another researcher from the same research area who then notified the journal on this issue. In 2010 an investigation conducted at the University of Leuven found that philosophy professor has indeed committed plagiarism. Upon the inquiry K.U. Leuven notified the journal editors about the results of the investigation and stated that plagiarised work is no longer considered as the scientific output of the university as well as that professor has resigned'"`UNIQ--ref-00000002-QINU`"'.
'"`UNIQ--references-00000003-QINU`"' +
A reviewer from an NIH study section gives a trainee a research project based on a submission she reviews. +
This article is about allegations of plagiarism against the Romanian minister of education and research, Ioan Mang. Mr. Mang's 2004 publication is believed to be a near-identical copy of a paper authored by the Eli Biham, the dean of computer science at the Technion Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa. +
The US Public Health Service found that a researcher at the Harvard School for Public Health engaged in scientific misconduct in research funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), National Institutes of Health (NIH). +
Plagiarism charge for Romanian minister - Scandal adds to fears that country’s research reform is in peril +
Romania’s new government was thrown into turmoil last week after its education and research minister, Ioan Mang, was accused of extensive plagiarism in at least eight of his academic papers.
The allegations first began circulating on 7 May, just hours after Prime Minister Victor Ponta, a Social Democrat, announced the appointment of Mang and other ministers of the new government. Last week, former prime minister Emil Boc, of the Democratic Liberals, called for Mang’s resignation, dramatically waving the allegedly plagiarized articles and the original papers in front of television cameras.
The scandal has dismayed many Romanian scientists, who are already nervous that the incoming centre-left coalition government might reverse some of the energizing reforms that were introduced by the previous centre-right coalition to improve the country’s sluggish research system +
A committee on scientific dishonesty investigated accusations of plagiarism that a supervisor brought against his student. The student was accused of plagiarizing figures, equations and text from (1) the supervisor’s published and unpublished work and (2) the PhD dissertation of a former student of the supervisor. The committee ruled largely in the supervisor’s favour, though it stipulated that the use of others’ material did not always constitute plagiarism. The student corrected their thesis. +
Investigation finds more cases of duplication in publications co-authored by ministers and senior officials. ''Nature'' has uncovered further instances of apparent plagiarism in papers co-authored by government ministers and senior officials in Iran. The spate of new examples raises questions about whether such incidents are symptomatic of conditions also common in other developing countries — such as difficulties with English or pressure to acquire academic credentials as a prerequisite for promotion — or whether they are also linked specifically to the Iranian regime, where growth of a merit-based university culture has been undermined by political appointments and purges of reform-minded scientists. +
Based on an investigation conducted by Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center, the Office for Research Integrity found that an Associate Professor in Immunology/Microbiology engaged in scientific misconduct involving two instances of plagiarism in publications related to two Public Health Service (PHS) grants. +
This introductory micromodule explores the concept of Planetary Health as a framework linking human well-being with the state of natural systems. Through an animated video and guided reflection, participants will examine how human activities have breached planetary boundaries, exacerbating health inequalities and environmental injustices. The module fosters ethical awareness and encourages learners to consider sustainability as a foundational principle of responsible research and innovation. +
Platforma za otvorenu nauku (2018), Ministry of Education Science and Technological Development (MESTD) +
The Platforma za otvorenu nauku (2018), produced by Serbia’s Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development (MESTD), provides a national framework for open science and open access in Serbia. It translates high-level principles into actionable guidance for researchers, institutions, funders, and publishers, promoting openness as the default while respecting ethics, privacy, intellectual property, and security. The platform links openness to research quality, reproducibility, equitable access, and faster translation of knowledge, particularly for communities with limited resources. Key elements include open access to publications with preferred licensing (e.g., Creative Commons), deposition in trusted repositories, FAIR data principles, and detailed data management plans. Responsibilities are defined for authors and institutions, covering funding acknowledgment, rights retention, and budgeting, while justified embargoes and sensitive-data exceptions are transparently documented. It encourages enabling infrastructure repositories, registries, discovery services and aligns with international initiatives such as Plan S and the European Open Science Cloud. Assessment focuses on the quality of openness, including machine-readable metadata, persistent identifiers, and sharing of methods, code, and data. Equity, multilingual communication, and capacity building are emphasized. Implementation relies on early planning, institutional support, and funder-backed infrastructure. The document serves as a practical reference, checklist, and benchmark, supporting compliance, transparency, reproducibility, and harmonization with global norms. +
Through interactive exercises, learners explore podcasting as a format for communicating research practices and results. They examine how audio content shapes understanding, engagement, and accessibility, and how different podcast formats influence the way research is presented.
Participants analyse the role of structure, voice, and perspective in guiding listeners through complex information. They also reflect on ethical considerations in podcasting, including framing, representation, uncertainty, and credibility.
By the end of the module, learners will be able to plan a podcast concept based on audience, purpose, and context, and apply responsible communication principles to their own research practice. +
This policy brief presents a Glossary for Academic Integrity that collates 208 terms and their definitions related to academic integrity and misconduct, drawn from 60 core national and international sources. Because there is considerable variation and ambiguity in how academic integrity concepts are used, the glossary aims to provide a shared understanding across institutions, disciplines, and jurisdictions. It covers concepts such as plagiarism, contract cheating, authorship ethics, self-plagiarism, and integrity management, including synonyms and contextual nuances. The document encourages its use as a living tool, adaptable over time as new terms and practices evolve. It is intended as a foundational resource for educators, institutions, policy developers, ombudspersons, and students to coordinate consistent practices around academic integrity. +
This is a policy brief produced under COALESCE a European science-communication initiative. The brief draws on a state-of-the-art review, interviews and workshops involving actors from the “quadruple helix” (science, policy, industry, civil society) to explore how science communication can respond to urgent societal challenges. It outlines existing communication practices from traditional one-way dissemination and fact-checking to two-way and multi-way, participatory models and evaluates their effectiveness in a “post-truth” environment marked by misinformation and distrust. The document reviews existing tools and resources (e.g. media-literacy toolkits, fact-checking guidelines, crisis-communication frameworks) and proposes strategies for building a more robust, trust-oriented science communication ecosystem. Its goal is to inform a future European Competence Centre for Science Communication that supports scientists, communicators, policymakers and other stakeholders. +
Policy Statement on Open Access for Publications from Publicly Funded Research Projects Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) (2014), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) +
The Policy Statement on Open Access by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) provides national guidance for researchers, institutions, funders, and publishers in China. Written in Chinese, it frames openness as the default, balanced by ethics, privacy, intellectual property, and security. Key elements include open access to publications, FAIR data principles, persistent identifiers, and deposition in trusted repositories. Responsibilities for authors and institutions cover rights retention, funding acknowledgment, and cost management. Exceptions for sensitive or commercial data are documented transparently. The policy encourages enabling infrastructure, training, and monitoring, aligned with international standards like Plan S. Equity, responsible openness, and inclusion are emphasized. For practitioners, it offers a practical checklist to improve transparency, reproducibility, and equitable access. Published in 2014, it is a credible reference for implementing open research in China. +
The AIOLIA policy brief “AI Ethics: From Principles to Practice” focuses on bridging the gap between ethical AI principles and their practical implementation in organizations. While frameworks such as the EU AI Act and the Assessment List for Trustworthy AI (ALTAI) define ethical requirements, many organizations struggle to apply these principles consistently during the development and deployment of AI systems. The policy brief argues that ethical AI requires more than compliance with regulations; it must become part of an organization's governance, culture, and decision-making processes.
Based on experiences from ten AI use cases across sectors including healthcare, human resources, security, automotive engineering, elderly care, and AI companions, the AIOLIA project developed practical methods to support responsible AI. These include 175 organizational and technical measures, 12 contextualized ethics principles, and six policy recommendations that help translate abstract ethical concepts into actionable practices. The brief also recommends improving implementation guidance, updating existing assessment tools, expanding regulatory sandboxes for innovation, encouraging collaboration between academia and industry, and investing in research on AI's long-term societal impacts. Overall, it promotes a practical, continuous approach to developing trustworthy and human-centered AI. +
The AIOLIA policy brief “Ethical Challenges of AI Companions” examines the ethical and regulatory issues arising from AI systems that build ongoing, emotionally engaging relationships with users. These AI companions include dedicated chatbot applications and general-purpose AI models that provide emotional support, personal coaching, entertainment, or advice through repeated interactions. Unlike traditional AI tools, AI companions can influence users' emotions, decisions, and behaviors over time, creating risks such as emotional dependency, manipulation, privacy loss, and reduced human autonomy.
The brief argues that current European regulations, particularly the AI Act, focus mainly on transparency by requiring users to be informed that they are interacting with AI. However, this alone is insufficient because users may knowingly interact with AI while still becoming emotionally attached or behaviorally influenced over time. To address these emerging risks, the policy brief recommends four governance measures:
(1) identifying and protecting users whose vulnerability develops during long-term interactions,
(2) implementing longitudinal oversight that monitors patterns across repeated conversations rather than isolated exchanges,
(3) designing AI systems with intentional "friction," such as reflective prompts and breaks to reduce over-engagement, and
(4) moving beyond simple disclosure by providing contextual transparency +
The German Rectors' Conference (HRK) is the leading association of higher education institutions in Germany, with over 250 members. Besides engaging in public and political policy shaping, the HRK also develops and sets institutional standards in education. In this regards, they publish regulations and guidelines that are required to be followed at member institutions. +
The ''Policy on Ethics and Scientific Integrity'' (2014), authored by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche, is a national framework promoting research integrity in France. Written in French and targeting French researchers and institutions, it formalises principles of honesty, accountability, professional courtesy, and stewardship of resources, linking these to reproducibility, credibility, and societal trust. It defines responsibilities across the research cycle, including authorship, citation, conflict-of-interest management, transparency of methods and data, responsible supervision, and fair peer review. Procedures for handling misconduct are outlined, ensuring due process, proportional sanctions, and learning opportunities. By aligning with international standards, the policy connects French practice to global norms, supporting mobility and comparability of researchers. Education and training on responsible conduct are emphasised, alongside guidance on open science, digital tools, and data management. Equity and diversity are integrated as cross-cutting themes. Combining principles with practical tools, glossaries, and reporting systems, it serves as both a policy and a practical handbook. +
Policy on Open Access (2017), produced by NordForsk for Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, sets out practical guidance for open science in the Nordic region. It frames openness as the default—balanced by ethics, privacy, intellectual property, and security—and promotes the principle of being “as open as possible, as closed as necessary.”
The policy requires open access to publications via clear compliance routes, Creative Commons licensing, persistent identifiers, and deposition in trusted repositories. It aligns with FAIR data principles, encouraging data management plans that address stewardship, metadata standards, and repository choice. Embargoes are limited and exceptions must be transparently justified.
Responsibilities are defined for researchers (plan for openness, acknowledge funding, retain rights), institutions (training, repositories), funders (support core infrastructure), and publishers (enable rights retention, interoperability). Compliance is monitored through reporting, metadata quality, and transparency of outputs rather than volume alone.
Equity is central: the policy promotes zero-embargo access where possible, publisher-agnostic routes, and multilingual communication. It also stresses responsible openness, safeguarding personal, health, or Indigenous data through oversight and secure environments.
Overall, the policy gathers fragmented rules into one reference, links Nordic practice to global initiatives like Plan S and EOSC, and provides actionable steps for researchers, managers, librarians, and policymakers. +
