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
"
An anthropologist finds their work has been plagiarised. The University Press claimed that while there had been plagiarism there had been no copyright infringement. +
A researcher in an urban ghetto is offered some stolen goods as a gift. Accepting or not accepting the goods has implications for the researcher's integration into the community she is studying. She accepts the stolen clothes but not the record player. +
A researcher used the help of a professional writer to write a research paper. Since she paid for the service, she did not plan to disclose the contribution after the first draft was finished. Her unwillingness to acknowledge the contribution made the company providing the service threaten her that the writer would not finish writing the paper. She changed her mind only when the editor of the journal where she had intended to submit her paper responded that even paid writing assistance should be acknowledged. +
'
This is a factual case. The journal Pattern Recognition in Physics (PRP) was started by ''Copernicus Publications'' in March 2013. After publishing a special issue on ''“Pattern in solar variability, their planetary origin and terrestrial impacts”'' was published a series of concerns about the selection of referees (nepotism) were raised. This resulted in Copernicus Publications shutting down the journal. +
This factual case describes an instance of plagiarism by a peer reviewer. The peer reviewer had sent the unpublished manuscript to a colleague with whom he was writing a review. Portions of text from the manuscript under review ended up in the published review written by the peer reviewer and his colleague. The review was retracted, and the peer reviewer apologized. +
0
This case analysis uses a procedure advanced by Jack R. Fraenkel (1976) for the purpose of values education.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000061-QINU`"' Fraenkel (1932-2013) earned a PhD from Stanford University in 1966 and subsequently worked at San Francisco State University for more than 30 years. When he retired, he was Professor of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000062-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-00000063-QINU`"' +
02 - The Seven Steps Method: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity +
The Seven Steps Method is a checklist developed to assist with ethical decision making. The method involves responding to the following seven “what” questions:
<br />
*What are the facts?
*What are the ethical issues?
*What are the alternatives?
*What are the stakeholders?
*What are the ethics of alternatives?
*What are the practical constraints?
*What is the action to take? (Werhane et al. 1990[[#%20ftn1|<sup><sup>[1]</sup></sup>]])
These questions are designed to encourage a dialectical way of engaging with an ethical problem, so that (in cases where there is enough time) one can revise previous answers several times during the process. Various versions of this model are suggested for different professions. For instance, the Seven Step Method for ethical decision making in counselling (Miller and Davis 2016[[#%20ftn2|<sup><sup>[2]</sup></sup>]]) or management (Harold Fogelberg 2018[[#%20ftn3|<sup><sup>[3]</sup></sup>]]) are slightly different than the above model. Nevertheless, in principle, they all aim to help ethical decision making.
A more extensive version of this model is developed to address the ethical issues faced in scientific and academic contexts. In ''Ethics and the University'', Michael Davis adds several sub-questions to the original model and fine-tunes it for academic purposes (Davis 1999[[#%20ftn1|<sup><sup>[4]</sup></sup>]]). Being aware of the complexities of using moral theories for non-philosophers, his version of the model provides a framework for an orderly discussion of ethical issues using common sense.
----
[[#%20ftnref1|<sup>[1]</sup>]] Werhane, P., Bowie, N., Boatright, J., Velasquez, M. (1990), The Seven Step Method for Analyzing Ethical Situations [Online Material]. Retrieved February 25, 2019, from '"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000010-QINU`"'
[[#%20ftnref2|<sup>[2]</sup>]] Miller, H. F., Davis, T. E. (2016). Practitioner’s Guide to Ethical Decision Making. Published by: The Center for Counseling Practice, Policy, and Research. Retrieved February 26 2019, from '"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000011-QINU`"'
[[#%20ftnref3|<sup>[3]</sup>]] Fogelberg, H. (2018, August 28). 7 Step model for ethical decision making [Web blog post]. Retrieved February 25, 2019, from '"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000012-QINU`"'
[[#%20ftnref1|<sup>[4]</sup>]] Davis, M. (1999). Ethics and the university. London: Routledge.
03 - Four Quadrant Approach: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity +
In a collaborative effort, three clinical ethicists, a philosopher, Jonsen, a physician, Siegler, and a lawyer, Winslade, developed the ‘four quadrant approach’ (‘4QA’) for dealing with difficult cases in clinical settings.[[#%20ftn1|<sup><sup>[1]</sup></sup>]] The process can be viewed as an “ethics workup,” similar to the “History and Physical” skills that all medical students come to use when learning how to “workup” a patient’s primary complaints.
The full procedure of the 4QA involves three stages and a list of distinctive steps:
#The first stage identifies and describes our initial perception of the case;
#The second involves the four quadrants (medical indications, patient preferences, quality of life, contextual features) and the identification of information relevant to a given quadrant;
#The third involves the application of case-based reasoning to identify and justify the best course of action.
----[[#%20ftnref1|<sup>[1]</sup>]] Jonsen A, Siegler M, Winslade W. Clinical ethics: a practical approach to ethical decisions in clinical medicine. Mc-Graw Hill, 6th edition, 2010.
[[#%20ftnref2|<sup>[2]</sup>]] http://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/tools/cesumm.html +
04 - Moral Case Deliberation: A Method for Analysing Cases in Research Ethics and Research Integrity +
Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) aims to combine reflection on concrete cases with procedures to foster moral learning. In MCD in health care settings, patients, family members and health care staff discuss a moral question. MCD can be regarded as a form of Clinical Ethics Support (CES) or REC assessment in health care and biomedical research, helping health care professionals to reflect on their actual ethical questions and reasoning, and to find answers in acute cases. MCD is about listening and asking the right questions, rather than convincing the other, and postponing one’s own judgements in the interests of being open to other viewpoints.
The validity and reliability of knowledge claims and moral judgments are constructed and examined within the practice itself. In the end, the reliability and validity of the judgments are determined in experience and in the practice of daily life. The MCD facilitator or the MCD participants can refer to existing theories and concepts, as well as existing normative frameworks (such as policies, laws, professional codes etc.). The point is, however, that ethical issues are not defined beforehand, but are derived from practice.
In MCD, the moral problem under consideration is always a concrete moral issue, experienced by one of the participants. This issue is presented as a case (for example, concerning a treatment decision with an individual patient). The case is analysed not by applying general moral concepts or principles but by investigating the values and norms of the stakeholders. In a MCD, different viewpoints are examined. The initial aim is not to decide which perspective or answer is right, but to ask open and critical questions in order to elaborate assumptions behind the perspective and find out how they are applicable to the case at hand.[[#%20ftn1|<sup><sup>[1]</sup></sup>]]
----[[#%20ftnref1|<sup>[1]</sup>]] Stolper M, Molewijk B, Widdershoven G. Bioethics education in clinical settings: theory and practice of the dilemma method of moral case deliberation. ''BMC Med Ethics'' 2016;17(1):45.
[http://www.reviewingresearch.com/realistic-decisions-making-judgements-in-committee/ REalistiC Decisions] is a case analysis method proposed by [https://uk.linkedin.com/in/hugh-davies-61029750 Hugh Davies] MB BS, Research Ethics Advisor for the Health Research Authority (‘HRA’) and former Consultant Paediatrician at Oxford University Hospitals.
Although intended to be a procedure for reviewing research ethics proposals, it is flexible enough to be used to analyse research integrity cases.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000018-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-00000019-QINU`"' +
This method was developed by Ferrer[[#%20ftn1|<sup><sup>[1]</sup></sup>]] and applied by a group of investigators from Graduate Education in Research Ethics for Scientists and Engineers (GERESE) at the University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez campus (UPRM). The aim of the project was to integrate research ethics into the graduate curriculum in science and engineering[[#%20ftn2|<sup><sup>[2]</sup></sup>]].
----[[#%20ftnref1|<sup>[1]</sup>]] Ferrer, J.J. (2007), “Deber y Deliberación una Invitación a la Bioética” Cep, Mayagüez, Puerto Rico.
[[#%20ftnref2|<sup>[2]</sup>]] Valdes, D., & Jaramillo Giraldo, E., & Ferrer, J., & Frey, W. (2009, June), Case Analysis: A Tool for Teaching Research Ethics In Science And Engineering For Graduate Students Paper presented at 2009 Annual Conference & Exposition, Austin, Texas. '"`UNIQ--nowiki-00000002-QINU`"' +
1
"10 Things for Curating Reproducible and FAIR Research" describes the key issues of curating reproducible and FAIR research (CURE-FAIR). It lists standards-based guidelines for ten practices, focusing primarily on research compendia produced by quantitative data-driven social science. +
3
This article introduces three whistle-blowers and describes their journey in blowing a whistle.
*First one is about Uri Simonsohn of University of Pennsylvania who calls himself a data-whisperer. Uri was the one who blew the whistle on two famous cases of data fabrication and data manipulation, namely those involving Dirk Smeesters and Lawrence Sanna.
*The second case is about Helen Hill of University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey who persisted for nearly 14 years to expose Anupam Bishayee's misconduct and repeatedly failed.
*The third person uses the pseudonym "Clare Francis" to flag suspicious cases of plagiarism or figure manipulation/duplication.
<br /> +
In this podcast, produced by Wiley, Brian Nosek gives three insights into what researchers and the research community can do to "close the gaps between research values and practice". +
A
This blog post is about the retraction of a 24-year-old paper that had plagiarised a 1975 article. At the time of retraction, the author held an executive position in the private education sector in Southern Africa. +
A researcher sought to include a figure from a textbook in his manuscript for a forthcoming submission. Their colleague recommended asking permission to reproduce the figure from the publisher of the book. The researcher emailed the publisher and permission was granted without any charge. +
A junior researcher published an article. A senior researcher of the organisation read the article and noticed the striking resemblance of the article topic with one of his accepted research projects, which was still in ongoing. They asked the junior researcher for their raw data. The junior researcher was unable to provide the data. Finally, they admitted to fabricating the data. +
A postgraduate medical student at Mashhad University of Medical Sciences (Mashhad, Iran) complained to the vice chancellor of research that they had not been included in the authors list of an article, which used results from her thesis. The senior researcher involved in her thesis claimed that she has forgotten to include the student as an author. +
A researcher at Mashhad University of Medical Sciences (Mashhad, Iran) included a senior researcher of another department in the authors list of their article. Although the senior researcher was not aware of their inclusion, he thanked the researcher upon receiving a copy of the published article. +
Upon acceptance of a manuscript prepared by a researcher, the editor-in-chief of the journal asked the researcher to add an article published in their journal to the reference list. The researcher agreed to the request. +
A researcher submitted a manuscript to two journals simultaneously. The decision of the editorial boards of both journals was to accept the article with minor revisions. The researcher emailed the editor in-chief of one of the journals and withdrew her submission. The article was published in the other journal. +
A researcher submitted a manuscript to a journal. After a couple of months of not hearing from the editorial board, they re-submitted the manuscript to another journal. A day after re-submission, they received an email from the first journal that their article was going to be accepted after minor revisions. They withdrew the re-submission from the second journal. +
A researcher had previously published an article in his native language. They prepared another article in English and submitted it to another journal. The manuscript was accepted for publication. However, the editor in-chief of the English journal managed to find out about the first article and asked the author to clarify the issue. The researcher asked for permission from the first journal to publish the article in English in another journal. Permission was granted. The article was published in English. +
This case study describes how secondary qualitative data can be used and how the data can be anonymized. One issue arising from anonymisation of qualitative data is losing important contextual information. Ethical, practical and theoretical questions emerge when delving into the issue of anonymization of qualitative data for secondary use. In addition, the study describes some strengths and weaknesses of anonymization policies.
'"`UNIQ--references-000001C0-QINU`"' +
This is a resource for various stakeholders (scholars, funders, regulators, and ethics board) who are interested in how research in ethnography complies with the current requirements on data protection (GDPR) and open science. +
Renowned psychologist Dan Ariely literally wrote the book on dishonesty. Now some are questioning whether the scientist himself is being dishonest. A landmark study that endorsed a simple way to curb cheating is going to be retracted nearly a decade later after a group of scientists found that it relied on faked data. According to the 2012 paper, when people signed an honesty declaration at the beginning of a form, rather than the end, they were less likely to lie. A seemingly cheap and effective method to fight fraud, it was [https://www.fastcompany.com/3068506/lemonade-is-using-behavioral-science-to-onboard-customers-and-keep-them-honest adopted] by at least one insurance company, [http://38r8om2xjhhl25mw24492dir.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/BIT_FraudErrorDebt_accessible.pdf tested] by [https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/images/2016%20Social%20and%20Behavioral%20Sciences%20Team%20Annual%20Report.pdf government] [http://38r8om2xjhhl25mw24492dir.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/BIT_FraudErrorDebt_accessible.pdf agencies] around the world, and taught to corporate executives. It made a splash among academics, who cited it in their own research more than 400 times. +
This guideline, published by the National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH), is meant to supplement the Ethical guidelines for research in the social sciences, humanities, law and theology (alo published by NESH. It is important because it pertains specifically to internet research, the use of which is growing in the social sciences and humanities. +
This guidebook is intended for teaching specific topics on responsible conduct of research (RCR) to a trainee group with different cultural backgrounds. The aim is to address the training needs of the large group of international postdocs. Materials presented in this guidebook could also serve as model content for RCR instruction of international trainees. +
In 2014 in a stemcell research institute in Japan a research misconduct case came to light. The case was excessively covered by the media, with the media not only portraying the accused scientists as perpetrators, but criticizing the entire research centre. One of the members of the research centre committed suicide, causing upheaval in the Japanese research scene. As the case describes, the damage of the scientific misonconduct reaches far beyond the misconduct itself. +
A supervisor writes an unsolicited and critical recommendation letter behind the back of his postdoc researcher who had not informed him of his application. The letter sketches a negative picture of the applicant. +
A case study appearing in a blog site that posts on sexual misconduct in higher education. Sexual demands, bullying, coercion, harassment and a long list of similar behaviours are less frequently reported as misconduct in research ethics; but do these behaviours comply with the ECCRI'"`UNIQ--ref-0000052E-QINU`"''s principle of respect for colleagues? or, with the good research practices of safeguards and collaborative working?
'"`UNIQ--references-0000052F-QINU`"' +
This is a factual anonymized case about a person who worked as a medical writer for almost 11 years. During this time she has written a variety of texts including the occasional ghostwritten article. In the article she describes her experience, motivation and her views about the problem of fraud in authorship. +
A New Challenge to Research Ethics: Patients-Led Research (PLR) and the Role of Internet Based Social Networks +
This article addresses a new model of clinical research - Participants-Led Research (PLR). It also identifies ethical, legal and social issues as well as relevant concepts that may help solve them. +
Using the theme of Charles Dickens' "Christmas Carol," this amusing Norwegian video with English subtitles presents consequences of plagiarism. +
This is a factual anonymised case focused on the practice of Gift Authorship. +
This factual case details a so-called ‘First-in-man’ (FIM) clinical trial that seriously harmed the six participants who received the drug under investigation. The report discusses the consequences of the disastrous trial for later FIM trials. The article considers the scientific consequences, such as the procedure to determine the acceptable dose of the drug, and reviews the ethical dimensions of FIM trials, like potential monetary compensation for the risks the participants take.
'"`UNIQ--references-000001A8-QINU`"' +
This short guide explains the basic concepts regarding digital humanities and the role of academic institutions in this matter. It also describes the skills and competences needed for doing digital humanities work as well as learning outcomes for digital humanities. +
This study examines the status of Ph.D. communication education in research ethics. The findings show that no Ph.D. communication program has a course specifically dedicated to communication research ethics. +
A University of Liverpool investigation determined that a former researcher there fabricated his data +
In 2017 a promising young liver specialist, was found to have fabricated spectroscopic findings. Several retractions followed the investigation.'"`UNIQ--ref-000002F5-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-000002F6-QINU`"' +
This study provides information on evaluation of the citations related to publications by trainees in the Fogarty International Center's International Research Ethics Education and Curriculum Development program. The authors analyzed 328 papers published between 2004 and 2008. The results show that the number of citations per paper is 3, 12.6% of papers were cited more than 10 times and the h-index is 22. +
Retraction Watch presents the case of a researcher who failed to declare conflicts of interest in his research; he has also allegedly fabricated and falsified data on his research to reach certain conclusions. +
In this randomized study, authors measured Biostatistics and Research Ethics online course knowledge, compared to traditional on-site training of the same course. Online and on-site training formats led to marked and similar improvements of knowledge in Biostatistics and Research Ethics. +
A framework for assessing the quality of democratic deliberation: enhancing deliberation as a tool for bioethic +
This study offers a framework to a democratic deliberation (DD) project regarding surrogate consent for dementia research. The authors concluded that participants learned and used new information, were collaborative and satisfied with the study. The participants also provided societal policy recommendations with regard to surrogate consent. +
A guidebook for teaching selected responsible conduct of research topics to a culturally diverse trainee group +
The aim of this textbook from the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia was to address the training needs of a large group of international postdocs regarding the RCR. The textbook contains a summary of different themes related to RCR, a script to facilitate small group discussions and teaching materials for topics regarding data management, intellectual property and research misconduct.
<br /> +
A meta-analysis of studies of publication misrepresentation by applicants to residency and fellowship programs +
This study evaluates percentages of applicants to residency and fellowship programs that have publication misrepresentation reported in the literature. Most misrepresentations regard listing nonexistent articles, errors in authorship order and non-authorship. The study shows that misrepresentation decreases when uniform inclusion criteria are applied. +
A proposal for a model of informed consent for the collection, storage and use of biological materials for research purposes +
This article suggests a model of informed consent intended for the collection, storage and use of biological materials in local biobanks for health research purposes. The model can serve as a useful guideline for the development of specific consent forms that can be used by researchers. +
A qualitative approach to Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) training development: identification of metacognitive strategies +
This article discusses qualitative approach to RCR training development, based on a sensemaking model. It identifies nine metacognitive reasoning strategies for future development of RCR training. +
The authors of this study conducted a scoping review to explore the competency requirements for editors of biomedical journals. They informed that this was the first step to develop a set of core competences for editors of biomedical journals. +
The study described systematic efforts to develop instructional programs with regard to defining and planning learning needs and environment as well as evaluating learning. The focus of the study was on research ethics. It concluded that a systematic framework to develop instruction in research ethics needs to be applied. +
This study presents an overview of virtue ethics theory. It also identifies common ethical problems in community-based participatory research (CBPR). The authors discuss how virtues can be used as a guide in ethical research practice. +
<div>
In 2021, the UK's National AI Strategy recommended that UK Government’s official Public Sector Guidance on AI Ethics and Safety be transformed into a series of practice-based workbooks. The result is the [https://www.turing.ac.uk/research/research-projects/ai-ethics-and-governance-practice AI Ethics and Governance in Practice Programme]. This series of eight workbooks provides end-to-end guidance on how to apply principles of AI ethics and safety to the design, development, deployment, and maintenance of AI systems. It provides public sector organisations with a Process Based Governance (PBG) Framework designed to assist AI project teams in ensuring that the AI technologies they build, procure, or use are ethical, safe, and responsible.
This workbook explores how a context-based and society-centred approach to understanding AI Fairness can help project teams better identify, mitigate, and manage the many ways that unfair bias and discrimination can crop up across the AI project workflow.</div><div></div> +
In 2021, the UK's National AI Strategy recommended that UK Government’s official Public Sector Guidance on AI Ethics and Safety be transformed into a series of practice-based workbooks. The result is the AI Ethics and Governance in Practice Programme. This series of eight workbooks provides end-to-end guidance on how to apply principles of AI ethics and safety to the design, development, deployment, and maintenance of AI systems. It provides public sector organisations with a Process Based Governance (PBG) Framework designed to assist AI project teams in ensuring that the AI technologies they build, procure, or use are ethical, safe, and responsible.
This first workbook provides an introduction to the AI Ethics and Governance in Practice programme and provides an outline of the key components that make up AI systems. +
In 2021, the UK's National AI Strategy recommended that UK Government’s official Public Sector Guidance on AI Ethics and Safety be transformed into a series of practice-based workbooks. The result is the [https://www.turing.ac.uk/research/research-projects/ai-ethics-and-governance-practice AI Ethics and Governance in Practice Programme]. This series of eight workbooks provides end-to-end guidance on how to apply principles of AI ethics and safety to the design, development, deployment, and maintenance of AI systems. It provides public sector organisations with a Process Based Governance (PBG) Framework designed to assist AI project teams in ensuring that the AI technologies they build, procure, or use are ethical, safe, and responsible.
This workbook is the first in a pair that provides the concepts and tools needed to put AI Sustainability into practice. +
In 2021, the UK's National AI Strategy recommended that UK Government’s official Public Sector Guidance on AI Ethics and Safety be transformed into a series of practice-based workbooks. The result is the [https://www.turing.ac.uk/research/research-projects/ai-ethics-and-governance-practice AI Ethics and Governance in Practice Programme]. This series of eight workbooks provides end-to-end guidance on how to apply principles of AI ethics and safety to the design, development, deployment, and maintenance of AI systems. It provides public sector organisations with a Process Based Governance (PBG) Framework designed to assist AI project teams in ensuring that the AI technologies they build, procure, or use are ethical, safe, and responsible.
This workbook is part two of two workbooks on AI Sustainability in Practice. +
ALLEA has been a long-standing voice in the fields of research ethics and research integrity via its Permanent Working Group Science and Ethics, which has covered a wide-range of issues relating to ethics and integrity. The flagship publication of the group is the ''European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity,'' which was revised in 2017 and is regarded as one of the most comprehensive guides outlining how researchers should conduct their work. +
A complaint was made to the Executive Board at VU Amsterdam regarding a research report submitted by a researcher affiliated with the university but who produced the report in a personal capacity. Nevertheless, the report stated that the researcher carries out work with a VU Amsterdam research group. A subsequent petition was made to LOWI on the basis that the Executive Board had informed the complainants that it is not the university's responsibility to conduct an investigation or make statements about the research due to the fact that the assignment was issued to the author in a personal capacity. This is a factual anonymized case. +
This online tutorial provides an overview of the importance of academic integrity. Participants will have the opportunity to learn strategies of how to identify plagiarism, conduct academic research, and properly cite citations. +
Academic Research in the 21st Century: Maintaining Scientific Integrity in a Climate of Perverse Incentives and Hypercompetition +
This study addresses perverse incentives and decreased funding as potential causes for unethical behavior. The authors conclude that academia and federal agencies should better support research and emphasize altruistic and ethical outcomes, not the output. +
This case presents four factual anonymised cases of misconduct practices occurring in PhD supervision. More specifically: a) engagement with regulatory processes (i.e., the case of deviation from the initially ethics-approved data collection procedures without informing the relevant regulatory body); b) problems of knowledge or understanding transfer (i.e., a misunderstanding between student and supervisor in relation to intellectual property); c) culturally specific issues in the PhD study (i.e., the writing of disjoined, sometimes plagiarised, paragraphs in the thesis of a student whose first language was not English); d) academic theft (i.e., a student discovered her ex-supervisor had published work containing a literature review very similar to her own). +
This handbook outlines important information you will need to know about correctly acknowledging your sources when you write a report, research paper, critical essay, or position paper. It provides guidelines for collaboration on assignments and writing code. The handbook also provides information about what constitutes violations of academic integrity and the consequences of committing such violations'"`UNIQ--ref-00000219-QINU`"'.
'"`UNIQ--references-0000021A-QINU`"' +
This flyer contains a wealth of small pointers for writing a paper, conducting research and working with others. You’ll find advice to help you on your way, and handy hints'"`UNIQ--ref-00000218-QINU`"'. +
This study presents different challenges in medical research, such as the need to manage public expectations for new discoveries and maintain the public trust as well as consider the gap between research costs and funding sources. The authors examined these and other challenges and offered recommendations to medical schools and teaching hospitals on dealing with them. +
This article informs on the best research record-keeping practices developed as an adjunct to a research project on research ethics. These practices provide separate standards for individual researchers, research group leaders and departments or institutions and are offered as ethical and practical guidelines for researchers. +
Carrie Mediln is a researcher who took a teaching position without completing her doctorate. She is routinely addressed by students as "Doctor" and is often introduced as "Doctor" Medlin during academic events and public speaking opportunities. She never clarifies that she did not receive a PhD degree. The case study asks whether Medlin has a responsibility to clarify her credentials. +
This law, that covers various aspects of research, innovation and integrity, establishes the framework for the Danish Research and Innovation Policy Council and the Danish Independent Research Foundation is are independent bodies that promote research. +
Learn about the different ways in which a researcher can act with (and without) integrity! +
This is an online tutorial for administrative staff which contains modules in five instructional areas: conflict of interest, financial management, mentor-trainee responsibilities, collaborative research and data management. +
Although the Dutch Code of Ocnduct for Researchers has previously undergone minor revisions, there is a need for more substantial changes in view of recent developments in international codes. This document provides an analysis if the pre-existing guideline and suggests modifications. +
This is a fictional case on conflict of interest in biomedical research, including questions for discussion. +
This is the factual case of an agriculture research scientist whose several papers were retracted following accusation of fake reviews. +
Besides the German National Research Foundation (DFG), other prominent research organizations such as the Alliance of German Science Organisations have also created codes and guidelines that deal with specific topics. This document addresses the importance of good data management practices and the principles therein. +
An author realized a paper had plagiarized his thesis. It took the journal four years to retract it. +
This blog post describes a case where the bachelor's thesis of a Hungarian mathematics student is plagiarised and published in ''Scientific Reports'' — a Springer Nature title. +
This article describes a study of the two most popular plagiarism-detection software platforms - Turnitin and SafeAssign and reviews current literature focusing plagiarism-detection efficacy. The study results show that Turnitin had the highest success at plagiarism detection with an 82.4 percent detection rate. +
This article presents a model of medical ethics teaching at undergraduate level. This model allows students to discuss ethical problems in small groups. +
Case describing poorly planned research study. +
This is the hypothetical scenario about the research process which was poorly planned. +
This article describes a student activity that consists of the video instructions and analysis and interpretation of realistic data. The activity allows students to apply their knowledge of statistics and research methodology to real situations without conducting actual research. +
This is a free online course intended for inspectors from the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) who conduct inspections of animal facilities for compliance with U.S. regulatory standards. The course is a field guide which presents animal facilities in a 360-degree panoramic image with some inspecting items and provides tips for inspecting them. +
This online training aims to help researchers in their research with animals. It contains three web modules. First one offers virtual tours of animal facility inspections. Second one deals with ethics and use of animals in research. Finally, third one provides information on the PHS Policy on human care and use of lab animals. +
Research Ethics Cases are a tool for discussing scientific integrity. Cases are designed to confront the readers with a specific problem that does not lend itself to easy answers'"`UNIQ--ref-000001FD-QINU`"'. +
On wrting a second ethnographic work about a village, the researcher went against the wishes of the villagers by not using their real names but acted in accordance with the Principles of Professional Responsibility of the American Anthropological Association. She made exceptions where she judged that using a real name would please the person. +
This fictional case is about an applied medical anthropologist who wrote a series of articles when she was working in an urban black community in the United States. She wrote her articles in an anonymous way so that individuals and/or the community would not be harmed. However, members of the community started a discussion because they were surprised that the name of the community health center and the name of the town were not given. +
Anticipate and Communicate. Ethical Management of Incidental and Secondary Findings in the Clinical, Research, and Direct-to-Consumer Contexts +
These guidelines aim to help researchers in biomedicine and health. They provide recommendations applicable to the ethical management of incidental findings in general and those relevant in specific situations. +
This study addresses one of the approaches in ethics training, focused on the development of ethical decision-making skills. It proposes a new curriculum with focus on day-to-day social and professional practices that have ethical implications for the physical sciences and engineering. The training resulted in researchers' increased ethical decision-making in relation to data management, study conduct, professional and business practices. +
This study aimed to outline research findings from psychology and neuroscience that are important for moral decision making. It also considers how ethics educators can implement these findings in ethics courses. The research findings provide explanations regarding psychologists' ethical decision making. It also offers guidance on how educators can assist future psychologists cope with problems of ethical decision making. +
‘Uzmanlıklarını aktarmak’ ve başkalarını eğitmek için gereken becerileri edinebilmek ve her bir alıştırmanın amaç, içerik ve didaktiğini anlayabilmek için, eğitim alan kişilerin bu alıştırmaları uygulamaları gerekmektedir. Bu nedenle bu eğitimi alan kişilerin, birinci ve ikinci yüz yüze oturumlar arasında, yüz yüze eğitimin ilk kısmında öğrendikleri ve deneyimledikleri 5 alıştırmayı kolaylaştırıcı olarak yönetmeleri gerekmektedir (<u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:36e82c9c-dc83-46cc-a043-df9d93f1801f Öz Beyan Yaklaşımı]</u>; <u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:628b20aa-3ad4-41b8-919b-e45ad17b3d8f Münazara ve Diyalog]</u>; <u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:35961b2d-6734-4bf9-a1d0-5893be9be3a5 Erdemler ve Normlar]</u>, <u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:D1cde436-f9a2-41fa-8706-95ee6389f009 Orta yol]</u> ve İkilem oyunu). +
Eğitim verdiğiniz katılımcılar, birinci ve ikinci yüz yüze oturumlar arasında, yüz yüze eğitimin ilk kısmında öğrendikleri ve deneyimledikleri 5 alıştırmayı kolaylaştırıcı olarak yöneteceklerdir (<u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:36e82c9c-dc83-46cc-a043-df9d93f1801f Öz Beyan Yaklaşımı]</u>; <u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:628b20aa-3ad4-41b8-919b-e45ad17b3d8f Münazara ve Diyalog]</u>; <u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:35961b2d-6734-4bf9-a1d0-5893be9be3a5 Erdemler ve Normlar]</u>, <u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:D1cde436-f9a2-41fa-8706-95ee6389f009 Orta yol]</u> ve <u>İkilem oyunu</u>). Katılımcıların bu deneyimleri hakkında bilgi sahibi olmak ve son yüz yüze grup oturumunu hazırlamak için eğitmenlerin katılımcılardan <u>[https://www.dropbox.com/s/1fmppqv189jxlqj/Self%20reflection%20form.pdf?dl=0 özdüşünüm formlarını]</u> toplamaları ve analiz etmeleri gerekmektedir. Bu formlar, eğitimin son oturumunda hangi konuların üzerinde durulması ve hangi alıştırmalar için daha fazla pratik yapılması gerektiğini belirlemede eğitmenlere yardımcı olacaktır. +
Bu interaktif modülü alarak aşağıdaki konular hakkında bilgi sahibi olacaksınız:
*[https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/hi/h2020-ethics_code-of-conduct_en.pdf Araştırmalarda Dürüstlük Konusunda Avrupa Davranış Kodu (ECoC)]: Kodun içeriğini öğrenirken aynı zamanda kodda tanımlanan iyi uygulamalar ve ihlaller üzerine de fikir yürütecek ve yorumlamalarda bulunacaksınız.
*'''Sorumlu araştırma davranışı, kusurlu araştırma davranışı ve tartışmaya açık araştırma uygulamaları:''' sorumlu uygulamalar, kusurlu davranışlar ve gri alanlar arasındaki farklılıkları öğrenecek ve bunların ECoC içerisinde nasıl ele alındığına dair yorumlamalarda bulunacaksınız.
*'''Araştırma davranışını etkileyen çeşitli faktörler: '''Araştırmacı olarak kendi sorumluluklarınız üzerine ve 1) bireysel araştırmacılar, 2) araştırma kültürü ve 3) araştırma sistemi düzeyinde iyi araştırma davranışlarının ihlal edilmesine yol açan muhtemel sebeplere dair fikir yürütecek ve yorumlamalarda bulunacaksınız. +
In this study authors used statistical methods to compare data from two clinical trials - one with concerns of research misconduct and other with no such concerns. The results showed that data from the suspected clinical trial were fabricated. +
This is a factual case.<br />
'"`UNIQ--references-00000165-QINU`"' +
This article provides a review of education materials in responsible conduct of research in biomedical and life sciences. Authors split their findings in several categories: data acquisition, management, sharing and ownership; mentor and trainee relationship; publication practices and responsible authorship; peer review; collaborative science; research on humans; research on laboratory animals; research misconduct; and conflict of interest. Authors hope this review will help raise awareness for responsible conduct of research among biomedical and life scientists. +
Professor Dale Goodman is asked by a non-academic journal to review a book about prostitution, which lies within the scope of expertise, even if the book is not academic. He tries to write an honest assessment of the book's merits and submits it to the journal, which changes the review's title upon publication without informing Goodman. The researcher believes that the new title, "Prison Babes" is harmful and misrepresents the book, the review and the discussed phenomenon. The case asks about the appropriate course of action in such situations. +
The National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia has various codes and policies on responsible research. The page contains an overview of the following codes and guidelines:
* The Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research
* The National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research
* The Australian Code for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes
* The NHMRC Research Integrity and Misconduct Policy
* Factsheets on reporting research misconduct
* Information on the Australian Research Integrity Committee +
Australian Guide to Managing and Investigating Potential Breaches of the Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research +
This guideline specifies the official procedures of investigating research misconduct (RM) in Australia. RM breaches, as defined in the guideline, occur on a spectrum, with RM being serious or repeated breaches of the Australian Code. +
The policy outlines requirements for institutions, and individuals engaged in Australian Research Council (ARC) business, to report to the ARC research integrity matters, and the action the ARC may take in response to reported breaches of the Code. It also describes how the ARC can refer concerns or complaints to research institutions, who, in accordance with the Code, are responsible for managing and investigating potential breaches of the Code. +
The Austrian Agency for Research Integrity (Osterreichische Agentur fur Wissenschaftliche Integritat - OeAWI) works to raise awareness of the standards of good scientific practice among scientists and researchers as well as the general public. It also contributes to ensuring that violations of the standards of good scientific practice are identified and remedied. The organisation works to strengthen the ethos of science and research, and advocates adherence to the code of conduct derived from that ethos. Its activities focus on investigating and preventing misconduct in research and scholarship, not on imposing sanctions for misconduct. Given that violations of the standards of good scientific practice are not necessarily also violations of applicable law, the OeAWI performs its duties as a complement to – but not in competition with – the legal system. Legislation relevant to science and research, the principles of research ethics and the standards of good scientific practice all contribute equally to ensuring a high degree of integrity in research and scholarship. +
This case described how the limited space in journals is not aligned with the increase in submissions. Due to publication pressure authors sometimes cut corners, which can lead to cases of misconduct.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000018D-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-0000018E-QINU`"' +
We received a letter from a third party, accusing author A of putting his/her name against an article, published in our journal, when the research itself belongs to author A's student.
Our journal is a fully English language publication and the accusing third party and author A are from a non-English speaking country, as is the student (assumedly). The accusing third party forwarded the student's research paper to the editor which is entirely written in another language but contained an English abstract.
The Editor contacted author A and the response received included an attached confirmation letter supposedly from his/her student stating that they had no involvement in the published work by author A and that their research is completely separate to the published paper by author A.
We have several concerns:
1. It is difficult for the editor to examine the abstract the third party sent to us against the published article by author A.
2. We do not know if the response letter emailed from author A, confirming no involvement in author A's paper, is genuinely from the student.
3. The accuser's identity or relation to the matter is unknown to us. Ideally the editor needs to contact the student directly but we need bona fide contact details of the student and we are not sure we would get it from the accuser or the accused author A. Google is also of little help as there are so many people with the name. +
Researchers everywhere are under increasing pressure to publish in high quality journals. The amount of space available in a journal such as ''Medical Education'' has not kept pace with the rise in submissions. Against a background of fierce competition, authors sometimes cut corners. This may lead to misconduct. This paper aims to explore the most common types of publication misconduct seen in the ''Medical Education'' editorial office, and to consider the reasons for this and the implications for researchers in the field. +
Authors couldn’t find a patient to give consent for case report. Then the patient found the report. +
This short text informs about a case of a 35-year-old woman with a mysterious mass that took 11 years to be diagnosed. Since the authors could not reach the patient to obtain her consent for publication, they removed any identifiable information and published the paper anyway. The patient eventually read the paper, recognized herself and asked for retraction. +
Although ICMJE clearly defines the role of authors through its [http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html sets of recommendations], authorship criteria are not always strictly followed. The recommendations get blurry and faded based on convenience, interpersonal conflicts, or become subjected to manipulation. Such is the case described in this scenario, where a young researcher has a dispute with his superior about a rightful co-authorship. A publication would propel his career, but it appears there is no room for discussion. +
A researcher is left feeling resentful after not having been made an author on a research paper even though the researcher provided the underlying idea for the project. +
This handout provides a broad conceptual subway map of the world of publication, to support the Authorship and Publication training provided by QUT Library and Office of Research Ethics and Integrity'"`UNIQ--ref-000001FB-QINU`"'. The map provides a framework to help explain and discuss the complex world of academic publication.
'"`UNIQ--references-000001FC-QINU`"' +
This article describes how the HF-ACTION investigators devised a system to address assignment of authorship on trial publications. The HF-ACTION Authorship and Publication (HAP) Scoring System was designed to increase dissemination, recognize investigator contributions to the trial and apply individual expertise in manuscript production. +
Authorship in scholarly manuscripts: practical considerations for resident and early career physicians +
This article addresses different issues regarding authorship in scholarly manuscripts. The authors suggest that residents and early career physicians need to be educated about authorship rules and problems as well as equitable resolutions. They also invite for considering alternative ways to credit authorship. +
This video is about determing authorship. It discusses the advantages and disadvantages of working alone or in a team. Advices are giving about working in a team. +
These guidelines are intended for researchers or publishers with aim of helping them identify what they need to request permission to reproduce material created by others, including images and text quotations. +
This study examined a plagiarism detection system PAIRwise for instructors, researchers and students. It showed that PAIRwise can detect verbatim plagiarism efficiently. +
Avoiding Plagiarism, Self-plagiarism, and Other Questionable Writing Practices: A Guide to Ethical Writing +
This tool is intended for students and researchers to identify and prevent questionable research practices. It deals particularly with plagiarism and self plagiarism. +
This short text gives five tips to avoid bias in qualitative data analysis: 1. Use multiple people to code the data; 2. Have participants review your results; 3. Verify with more data sources; 4. Check for alternative explanations; 5. Review findings with peers. +
Avoiding twisted pixels: ethical guidelines for the appropriate use and manipulation of scientific digital images +
This study provides 12 guidelines for digital image manipulation. The guidelines can be included into lab meetings and trainings of graduate students with aim of inciting discussion that could lead to the end of "data beautification". +
B
Beyond Bad Apples: Towards a Behavioural and Evidence-Based Approach to Promote Research Ethics and Research Integrity in Europe +
Based on a news from Times of India (TOI), a study regarding the development of a new indigenous gene was completely fake. The gene that was stated is a new variety of Bt Cotton or Bt gene (BNla106 truncated cry1 AC). Hence, the project team responsible for the study claimed that they had already developed a new variety of Bt cotton seeds. However, experts found that the construct of Bt cotton has a Monsanto gene (Mon-531), which exemplifies that the cotton seeds was never altered or still it is the common seed. Moreover, the variety of BT cotton was already brought in the public in the year 2008 and the paper work of the UAS was published in the Current Science regardless of dubious claims that was later found out and thus, the published work was later on withdrawn (dated December 25, 2007). In 2012, the Monsanto gene was introduced by the media through a UAS staffer that it was indeed present and was never altered at all. Furthermore, it was found out through a 129-page report that a scope was contaminated due to the seeds being mass multiplied. +
An anthropologist working for two organisation has been asked to delay her (developed) funding application with one organisation in order to faciliatate the other +
In 1986, Thereza Imanishi-Kari co-authored a scientific paper on immunology with five other authors including Nobel laureate David Baltimore '"`UNIQ--ref-000001AE-QINU`"'. Margot O'Toole, who was a postdoc in Imanishi-Kari's laboratory and also acknowledged in the paper “for critical reading of the manuscript”, reported Imanishi-Kari for fabrication after discovering laboratory notebook pages with conflicting data. Baltimore refused to retract the paper and Imanishi-Kari dismisses O'Toole from the laboratory. After a series of published statements in Nature and a bitter debate within the biomedical community '"`UNIQ--ref-000001AF-QINU`"', Baltimore and three co-authors then retracted the paper. Baltimore publicly apologized for defense of fabricated data and not taking a whistle-blower's accusations seriously '"`UNIQ--ref-000001B0-QINU`"'. The Office of Research Integrity (ORI) found Imanishi-Kari guilty for data fabrication and attempts of covering up those fabrications with additional frauds. However, the appeals panel of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) ruled that the ORI had failed to prove misconduct by Imanishi-Kari and dismissed all charges against her '"`UNIQ--ref-000001B1-QINU`"'. This is a factual case.
'"`UNIQ--references-000001B2-QINU`"' +
A woman brushes off her most recent diagnosis, Huntington disease (HD), and resists her doctor’s recommendations to tell her family about the diagnosis. By not disclosing this information to her family, they would not know that they might want to get tested for HD. Prior to diagnosis, the woman and her family provided genetic samples to a research database to investigate a genetic disease unrelated to HD. Since the database project required written consent for using samples in future research, the doctor wonders if he can run tests for HD on the stored samples that would include the materials of the woman and her family. +
'''Becoming an Ethical Researcher''' is a badged open course run by the Open University on its OpenLearn platform. This runs for 11 months of the year and was launched on 1 October 2020. It is designed to take 6 weeks of study for 2 hours per week. +
The “Code of Ethics for Scientific Research in Belgium” establishes the major principles of ethically justified scientific practice in Belgium. As the code already dates from 2009, many consider it to be out of date. All Flemish universities no longer refer to it and have replaced it by the ALLEA code. +
The Austrian Higher Education Conference published a new Best Practice Guide for Research Integrity and Ethic. The guide for research integrity and ethics presented here is a compilation of standards for good research practice and principles of research ethics. +
The article addresses misunderstandings and disputes regarding authorship in multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary health research teams. The authors propose a five-step "best practice" that includes the distribution of contributorship and authorship for multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary research. They conclude that this procedure involves dialogue and the use of a contributorship taxonomy as well as a declaration explaining contributorship. +
The study aims to explore the role of institutional culture in promoting research integrity. Research participants provide useful insighta in fostering research integrity, especially with regard to relationships and power differences between individuals or groups. +
This article provides several examples of bias in history research with an emphasis on cultural bias. The author concludes that while personal bias can be avoided, cultural bias is not easy to detect or avoid. +
A female physicist is applying for a prestigious job at a top university that has a reputation for being conservative. During the interview the physicist is asked if she has a significant other who works in the same field. Should she answer the question? +
Factual cases of research on people without their approval. +
An introductory series by Marianne Talbot exploring bioethical theories and their philosophical foundations. These podcasts will explain key moral theories, common moral arguments, and some background logic'"`UNIQ--ref-00000217-QINU`"'. +
This is a factual case describing how an immunologist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, Luk Van Parijs, was found to be solely responsible for more than 11 incidents of data fabrication in grant applications and papers submitted between 1997 and 2004. '"`UNIQ--ref-000001EB-QINU`"'
Van Parijs avoided jail after several prominent scientists wrote letters begging for clemency on his behalf and was sentenced to home detention, community service and financial restitution.'"`UNIQ--ref-000001EC-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-000001ED-QINU`"' +
<br />The Biomedical Alliance in Europe (BioMed Alliance) is a group of 34 European medical societies, with a total of more than 400,000 members, created in 2010 to unite researchers and healthcare professionals and address common issues at the European level. +
The Embassy of Good Science is a wiki platform developed in the EnTIRE project, which was granted in the EU Horizon 2020 programme four years ago. The platform and its relevance for Research Integrity (RI) in Europe and beyond were presented during the final conference of the project, which was held online on October 25th and 26th, 2021. '''This case scenario was submitted as a part of research integrity scenario competition that was held during the second day of the conference.''' +
This is a factual case that describes the reasons for the (potential) retraction of various articles. Most of these articles are retracted due to authorship issues, while others are potentially retracted due to data falsification. One of the articles is retracted because one of the co-authors was not aware of its publication, nor did he permit for the publication. +
This article discusses why faculty plagiarism and fraud happen in business organizations and among students. The authors offer advices to universities to help them develop ethical culture that would reduce the possibility of such research misconducts. Based on these recommendations, universities should create defined policies and standards, develop codes of conduct and guarantee training, among others. +
C
CHAllenges and innovative chaNGes in research Ethics Reviews (CHANGER) is a three-year Coordination and Support Action (CSA) project, funded by the European Union’s Horizon WIDERA programme aiming to promote changes in research ethics reviews by strengthening the capacities of researchers to incorporate ethical judgements in the project design and implementation, and by supporting capacity building of Research Ethics Committees (RECs) to address new challenges posed by new technologies and new research practices. +
These guidelines provide detailed guidance for research institutions, providing standards and best practices for institutions to implement to facilitate the conduct of good, ethical scientific research. +
This is a collection of case studies on publication ethics developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The collection is constantly updated with new cases which are submitted by COPE members. +
This COPE's guide provides basic principles regarding patient's consent for publishing medical case reports. It informs about what information needs to be collected and gives several examples of these forms. +
The COPE core practices are guidelines for all stakeholders involved in academic publishing. They replaced COPE’s previous code of conduct and may be used in addition to national codes of conduct. +
The flowcharts are designed to help editors follow COPE’s Core Practices and implement its advice when faced with cases of suspected misconduct and have been translated into a number of different languages'"`UNIQ--ref-000001FF-QINU`"'. +
These educational recourses provide recording of COPE seminars, webinars and COPE PPT presentations. They can serve as introduction regarding all research integrity issues related to publication ethics. +
Two authors wrote to an editorial committee to ask whether they could publish a paper anonymously. The authors work in a general practice, producing research that showed the health-related problems arising from the practice switching one of its contracts from one laboratory to another. The authors did not want to be perceived as assigning blame to any single party. The committee declined to publish the paper anonymously. This is a factual anonymized case. +
The Responsible Conduct of Research Framework describes policies and requirements related to applying for and managing funds from three Canadian Agencies (the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC)). Requirements related to performing research, disseminating results, and the processes that institutions and agencies must follow in the event of an allegation of a breach of policy are also outlined.
<br /> +
This is a factual case discussing the Kennedy Krieger lead paint study, where a United States Court of Appeals condemned what it called a “non-therapeutic research programme” using children. The court ruled that a parent cannot consent to the participation of a child in “non-therapeutic” research in the state of Maryland . The case involves issues that had been given little attention by the courts, such as children’s participation in research, proxy consent, and the duties of medical researchers towards their participants. The analysis includes a discussion of the relevance of the “therapeutic” versus “non-therapeutic” importance and value of a study, as well as cost-benefit analysis, the design of research, and study aims. +
This statement, developed at the 7th World Conference on Research Integrity in Cape Town in May 2023, outlines 20 recommendations aimed at improving fairness and equity in research practices, from conception right through to implementation. +
This is a factual case about Carlo Croce, a famous cancer researcher who has been charged with data falsification and other scientific misconduct. +
This is a collection of fictional and real case studies in research ethics, including questions for discussion. The cases are presented in written or video format. Topics include research misconduct, data acquisition and management, reproducibility, safe laboratory practices and animal welfare. +
This resource is a database of ethics cases from different fields of science: natural sciences, life sciences, engineering, social sciences, and business. Each case study includes a short description of the case and a link to either a full text version of the case or to its location on a web site maintained by another organization. +
The resource includes brief videos illustrating research ethics issues arising in academic settings. The core areas included are: Data Acquisition, Management, Sharing and Ownership; Conflict of Interest and Commitment; Human Subjects; Animal Welfare; Research Misconduct; Publication Practices and Responsible Authorship; Mentor/Trainee Responsibilities; Peer Review; Collaborative Science. +
This case study from The Office of Research Integrity (ORI) describes the beginning of a collaboration between three researchers with different research backgrounds. Sharon, Ben, and Terra start drafting a grant proposal, but they are not sure how to handle logistic issues. With regard to that, they need to answer these questions:
* Who should submit the proposal, through which university?
* Do all three need to get IRB approval to work on the project?
* What will happen if their work has practical applications?
* How should they go about answering these questions?
* Are there other important questions that should be asked as well? +
The study described an interesting case of incidental finding. It regards a 38-year old patient who was found to have a large right ventricular aneurysm. +
Case-based ethics instruction: the influence of contextual and individual factors in case content on ethical decision-making +
In this study, authors explored case-based ethics instruction. They looked at the whether ethical decision making could be influenced by contextual and personal factors, which had been integrated into the case content. The cases were altered in such a way to provide a clear description of the social context of the case and indicate the goals of the fictional characters. One result of the study is that the social context was important to facilitate sensemaking, which resulted in greater ethical decision making. +
Different guidelines relating to the ethics of research involving human subjects interpret the different ethical considerations involved in research in different ways. Using the Emanuel framework allows us to respond to the discrepancies between different guidelines in a consistent way. +
Three cases are presented. Are these cases Research Misconduct, Questionable Research Practices or Responsible Conduct of Research? Participants are asked for their normative judgement, after which a discussion takes place. At the end of the case, it is explained what was decided in the real case.
The moderator asks the participants not only to make their normative judgement, but also to think about why. Which norms and values are at stake? On which norms and values did you base your judgement? Which values are in conflict and which are more important to you? +
This project aims to develop and foster transparency and reproducibility in the collection, analysis and dissemination of research data. Its two main objectives are to develop resources and support activities that promote open science practices and also to foster methodological innovations that increase the effectiveness of open science practices. +
This study aims to develop and validate a series of risk scores to identify fabricated data. The authors argue that these risk scores could become part of a series of tools that provide evidence-based central statistical monitoring. They conclude that this could improve the efficiency of trials and minimize the need for more expensive on-site monitoring. +
This fictional case is about an Associate Professor. She submitted a proposal which received a score too low to be funded. She is wondering what she should do now, because she is certain that her method will work. +
Archaeological heritage is any vestige of human activity, in any form of remains, that is associated with a great cultural load. This charter is aimed at the global management and protection of archaeological heritage, by targeting all the stakeholders involved in such discipline, from governments, researchers, to enterprises, and the general public. +
This checklist serves to researchers to examine whether their planned work could involve a higher than minimal risk or increased sensitivity. This is a part of the document Ethics in Social Science and Humanities provided by the European Commission in 2018. +
This blog post describes what led to the horrific death of a young chemist at UCLA because she was not wearing a lab coat. +
Child protection and confidentiality: Surveying children’s experiences of violence, abuse and neglect +
In 2008 the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) decided to set up a comprehensive UK-wide study of the prevalence and impact of violence towards children and young people at home, in school and in the community. The study was the first ever in the UK to ask children and young people directly about all forms of violence experienced during childhood and within the past year. A UK-wide household survey was conducted in 2009 with 6196 participants, of whom 2160 were parents/carers of children under 11 years, 2275 were children and young people aged 11 to 17 years and 1761 were young adults aged 18 to 24 years. See www.nspcc.org.uk/childstudy for further details. +
The guidance 'Opinions on Strengthening Research Integrity of Our Country' has been jointly developed by a number of Chinese ministries and organisations (Science and Technology, Education, Finance, Human Resources and Social Security, Health, General Armament Department of People's Liberation Army, Academy of Sciences, Academy of Engineering National Natural Science Foundation and the Association for Science and Technology) with the goal of strengthening research integrity and innovation. The 'opinions' are statements on five areas: 1) the Importance and Urgency of Strengthening Research Integrity Promotion; 2) Guidelines, Principles and Objectives of Research Integrity Promotion; 3) The Development of a Legal System and Norms Relevant to Research Integrity; 4) The Management Institutions Related to Research Integrity; 5) Research Integrity Education and the Professional Ethics of Science Practitioners; 6) Supervisory and Disciplinary Mechanisms, and Research Misconduct; 7) Organizational Work and Leadership, and an Environment Beneficial to Research Integrity. +
In 2009, the National Natural Science Foundation of China introduced standards of professional ethics and a code of conduct for its members, funders, and governors. The aim of this document is to ensure the fair and impartial distribution of resources to research programs. It includes concrete guidelines on review, confidentiality, project management and also guidelines for individual comportment, laying out professional duties and virtues (e.g. self-discipline and honesty) for members. +
In this article, I discuss calls for access to empirical data within controversies about climate science, as revealed and highlighted by the publication of the e-mail correspondence involving scientists at the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in 2009. (J.W. McAllister) +
Reports a procedural stage of a misconduct investigation that aims to clarify wheather researchers had a previous knowledge that their published data were potentially flawed. Under scrutiny is a research paper on whether the apparent rise in temperature readings in the late twentieth century could be an artefact of measurement sites that shifted from the countryside to cities, which are warmer. +
This article describes ethical issues regarding the Study 329. The Study wanted to determine the efficacy and safety of imipramine and paroxetine in the treatment of adolescents with major depression. However, it did not comply with the study protocol and ignored important safety problems, which led to some harmful effects. +
A graduate student discovers that the lab she once worked for plans to publish research in which she played an integral role; she argues for co-authorship. +
The Coalition for the Advancement of Research Assessment’s Working Group on ‘Ethics and Research Integrity Policy in Responsible Research Assessment for Data and Artificial Intelligence (CoARA-ERIP)’ addresses the need for the integration of research ethics and research integrity into digital research practices and the evaluation of scientific research engaging digital transformative tools and (eventually) evaluated by AI. The primary objectives of ERIP are to develop policy, methods, and tools that contribute to ethical and responsible research assessment practices in the context of data and artificial intelligence (AI). This includes establishing principles and standards for the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data, as well as for AI and its eventual use the deployment of AI algorithms in research assessment processes. ERIP focuses on three area:<div>A. ‘Detection of AI-generated fake data or writing raises concerns’ [questions of research ethics and research integrity]</div><div>B. ‘Assessing data and AI research’ [how to value digital contributions to knowledge]</div><div>C. ‘The use of data and AI in research assessment’ [how to assess in this new digital research environment]</div>ERIP applies a trans-disciplinary approach across academic and other research institutions throughout Europe and globally. ERIP strives to be a platform that promotes equity in the European and global research community. It engages the full range of scientific research, including students and junior and senior researchers, across all types of research institutions and sectors.
ERIP brings European and global stakeholders together in an open dialogue among researchers, policymakers, funding agencies, and other actors to further the development and implementation of ethical research assessment policies for data and AI.
ERIP improves innovation in research evaluation policy and its implementation across universities and other research institutions regarding the engagement with data and AI methods and tools in scientific research. ERIP engages the cutting edge of transformative technologies and their impact on practices in scientific research, its contributions and communication.
Cochrane is an independent, non-profit organisation aiming to promote evidence-informed decision-making in healthcare, by gathering and summarizing the best and most relevant research in this field. The Cochrane-Library is a collection of high-quality, relevant, accessible systematic reviews and other synthesized research evidence, that provides information for professionals and patients in order to enhance healthcare knowledge and decision making. The articles are translated into 14 languages and reviewed by consumers and patients, to ensure the content is easily understandable. The library is freely available and up do date contains over 7.500 articles. +
This document, available in Croatian, lays down the general principles of scientific integrity to be followed by all researchers. It also gives instances of dishonesty in science. +
The Spanish National Research Council (CSIC) is a publicly funded autonomous research body that focuses on scientific and technological advancement. In order to the socially relevant and acceptable, scientific endeavors need to conform to ethical good practice principles such as respecting human dignity, the autonomy of research, transparency and social responsibility. In their good practice code, the CSIC elaborates further on the principles of research, obligations of researchers, publication ethics, institutional framework and also include references to the supporting legal documents. +
Because of structural imperatives that overemphasize the good of efficiency (number of publications, h-index), researchers may feel it is not possible to do justice to principles and values related to research integrity (e.g. taking time in order to improve the quality of one publication, rather than publishing as much as possible). In such a situation, a researcher experiences cognitive dissonance and moral distress. The psychological notion of cognitive dissonance refers to the mental discomfort experienced by someone who holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values. The ethical concept of moral distress denotes the experience of a person who knows what is the right thing to do, but is (or feels) unable to act accordingly. +
A group of three scientists fails to agree on the interpretation of their findings. One of the three decides to publish separately, the other two decide to wait for the first researcher's article to be published.
During the course of the project, the first researcher who is in the midst of the publication process, leaves the university. By accident, a fax from the publishing journal is sent to the old university, so the other two scientists discover where the first scientists intends to publish. They contact the journal, argue the first scientists interpretation is wrong and offer the journal their alternative view. +
Collaborative Working Between Academia and Industry: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project +
Members of The Embassy of Good Science have developed a set of eight scenarios for educational purposes and to stimulate strategic thinking about issues in research ethics and research integrity.
This scenario presents a hypothetical narrative concerning '''[https://zenodo.org/record/4063619#.X3cGT5NKjxQ collaborative working between academia and industry and the links with research integrity]'''.
It focuses on issues regarding:
*Conflicts of Interest between academia and industry;
*Data usage and data privacy;
*HARKing (Hypothesizing after the results are known);
*Preregistration of studies;
*Authorship criteria for academic publications;
*The duties of corresponding authors;
*Non-publication of results;
*Divergences in research integrity standards and processes between international collaborators.
It is interspersed with questions and resource suggestions that help guide researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators in their deliberations concerning the research integrity issues raised by the narrative. +
The main goal of this online training is to encourage researchers for collaborative research. It examines benefits and problems that researchers can encounter when collaborating with their colleagues. Apart from the foundation text, the module presents two case studies that explore concrete issues of collaborative research, section with questions and answers as well as resources related to this topic. +
Collaborative working is "the act of two or more people or organizations working together for a particular purpose". '"`UNIQ--ref-0000004D-QINU`"' Collaborative working can cover formal or informal ways to work together. Formal collaborations include research projects under specified research grants, informal collaborations include, for example, networks or alliances.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000004E-QINU`"' Collaborations can be permanent or last for a certain time period. Important for succesfull research collaborations is having good underlying principles providing the basis for agreements of collaborations.
'"`UNIQ--references-0000004F-QINU`"' +
Columbia grad student faked data in study of socioeconomics and life experiences, says retraction notice +
This is a factual case of fake data and misleading conclusions in the field of socio-economics. +
These guidelines contain basic principles and standards for all peer-reviewers. They can be applied across disciplines. +
This document presents a guide for young researchers on the area of authorship, which many people agree is one of the more confused areas. It helps new researchers prevent and resolve authorship problems. In particular it provides:
*suggestions for good authorship practice that should reduce the incidence of such dilemmas,
*advice on what to do when authorship problems do arise, and
*a glossary of key concepts in authorship, with some reading lists and websites for those who wish to take this further.
<br /> +
This study provides information on feasibility and acceptability of a new approach to community consultation and public disclosure (CC/PD) for a large-scale Exception From Informed Consent (EFIC) trial by encouraging community members in designing and conducting the strategies. The authors argue that this approach has demonstrated a feasible CC/PD plan. +
Een online Community of Practice omgeving die specifiek is ingericht is samen met anderen te werken aan je onderzoeksvaardigheden. In de Communityomgeving kun je op elk gewenst moment (mede)studenten in een besloten online omgeving uitnodigen om samen te werken, te leren, te discussiëren en te delen.
<br /> +
This is a supplement to the Common Guidelines for Education Research and Development, by the US National Science Foundation. It begins with 'a brief overview of the central role of replication in the advancement of science, including definitions of key terminology for the purpose of establishing a common understanding of the concepts'. It also addresses 'the challenges and implications of planning and conducting reproducibility and replication studies within education'. +
A researcher informally acquires knowledge of unpublished research results that support her theory.
She is invited to conference at an institution where she hopes to work. Is she allowed to share the research results which are not her own? +
This study addresses the need to disclose potential conflict of interest regarding physician-industry relations in preclinical education. Authors consider that introducing the concept of disclosure to the first and second year medical students would improve transparency and lead to benefits in their training. +
Conflict of interests pertain to situations that involve a person or organization with multiple interests (personal, professional, financial…). Working towards one interest could involve conflict with others. Conflicts can be (1) financial or (2) non-financial.
1) Treating patients and working for a pharmaceutical company (or owning their shares) that produces medicine for the same group of patients is an example of financial conflict of interests. Be prescribing and promoting medicine that is produced by this pharmaceutical company, the treating doctor may receive some sort of direct financial comission or have the value of their shares increased.
2) Non-publication of negative results and zero relations and making biased hypotheses are among examples of non-financial conflict of interests.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000029F-QINU`"' Researchers who hide their negative results (to make their data clean or their results more noteworthy), or hypothesise in a manner to yield their prefered results could be seen as examples of non-financial conflict of interests.
It is important to note that conflict of interest includes the potential for conflict as well, and these should always be reported.
'"`UNIQ--references-000002A0-QINU`"' +
The Spanish Superior Research Council (CSIC), in addition to their general good conduct guidelines, have also made specific guidelines to deal with conflicts of interest. This document aims to increase awareness among researchers regarding actual and potential conflicts of interest, as well as to equip researchers and research institutions to address these conflicts. +
This is a factual case. +
Citizen science, according to the [https://www.ecsa.ngo/ European Citizen Science Association (ESCA)], is "an ‘umbrella’ term that describes a variety of ways in which the public participates in science. The main characteristics are that: (1) citizens are actively involved in research, in partnership or collaboration with scientists or professionals; and (2) there is a genuine outcome, such as new scientific knowledge, conservation action or policy change." +
This fictional case is about an infectious disease researcher who is conducting a survey with men who are HIV positive and sexually active with partners of both sexes. This research contains sensitive information and the community leaders of the research population are not pleased with its results. +
This research paper'"`UNIQ--ref-00000699-QINU`"' presents two hypothetical scenarios on how citizen's science can be prone to accusations of research integrity violations.
'"`UNIQ--references-0000069A-QINU`"' +
This is a website intended to be a learning tutorial regarding ethics and the use of animals in research. It consists of an essay with numerous links to other websites. +
Contentious problems in bioscience and biotechnology: a pilot study of an approach to ethics education +
This study presents problem-based learning approach in analyzing "fractious problems" in bioscience and biotechnology. US students from science, engineering, social sciences, humanities and medicine analyzed these problems and presented their results to policy-makers, stakeholders, experts and public. The study concluded that this approach could help in educating future bioscientists and bioengineers. +
J.D. Brighton conducted a research about the perception of police behaviour in a small community. The local police chief requested access to the data in order to have the results confirmed by another researcher. Brighton is worried that sharing data would violate the trust of his participants and make it impossible to continue the research done with them. Moreover, he is worried that some of the participants could be identified by the police. The case study asks whether Brighton should grant access to data. +
Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine. An international tool to protect human dignity from abusive medical and biomedical innovations/technologies. The Convention is also known as the Oviedo Convention. +
Copy and paste: A slow university investigation into serious accusations of misconduct benefits no one +
This ''Nature'' article describes the case of a complaint about plagiarism, made by Bradley against George Mason University’s researchers. The article does not provide an answer as to whether the plagiarism claims are substantiated; instead, it focuses on the unnecessary long delays in the University’s internal investigations in dealing with the allegations. The delays appear to breach the university’s own timelines on misconduct investigations.
The article provides also an exploration of how such delays might have further adverse consequences; for example, they may provide possible loopholes in policy debating, or conversely, accumulate strain on those unfairly accused of wrong-doing. +
This factual case details a court's decision to uphold the prison sentence for a former researcher who was found guilty of scientific misconduct. The misconduct entailed the modification of HIV trial outcomes to make a drug look more effective. The attorney of the defendant appealed the decision, but the court decided to uphold the sentence. +
This text contains guidelines for journalists on how to report about science. For example, journalists should always put research in context, write about the whole research process and be careful when citing risk statistics. +
A student, a post-doc and a professor are working on a problem. They achieve good results in their research. When the student is finishing his master thesis, he discovers that the professor and his post-docs have published a paper on the experiment, that he designed an important part of. He is not given any credit in the paper. +
This blog presents the case of a criminology professor whose several publications were retracted or corrected. The retractions were initially requested by one of his co-authors. +
This case concerns the 2013 book publication of ‘’the Tyranny of the Weak’, published by a professor on the history of North Korea. In the book the author presents his historical research on how North Korea ‘survived’ the Cold War.
In 2014 another historian noticed several irregularities in the sources of the work of the professor and started investigating these irregularities. Many of these sources referred to archives, and were written in Russian, German, Chinese or Korean. The other historian decided to visit one of the archives in person to check the original sources. He states “[I checked] the collection there to reconstruct the original archival locations (…). This way it could be fully verified that the vast majority of the Russian archival citations from 1957-60 were invalid, because the cited files could not be found either in the Seoul collection or in the (essentially identical) Wilson Center collection.”
Upon this discovery, he also reached out to an archive in Berlin, where most sources could also not be located, or contained different information as suggested in the book. In addition, as the historian points out on Retractionwatch, several uncanny similarities appear to exist between "Tyranny of the Weak" and his own book on a similar topic.
The pofessor and book author, replied stating that “[t]he book was reviewed by two expert external reviewers before publication. In addition, before the book was published three years ago I shared the entire manuscript with one of the scholars who is currently critical of the book and is a renowned expert on the Russian sources on North Korea. At that time, this scholar did not find any problem with my use of sources, although he made a number of other comments which I incorporated in the final version of the book.” In 2015 the book earned 52 corrections in the new publication. +
Pavo Barišić says he won't step down after a parliamentary ethics committee found he copied another scholar's work. In a plagiarism scandal in Croatia, the country’s highest-level research ethics committee is clashing with its science minister — who says he won't step down after the committee found he had copied another scholar’s work. Scientists say the case raises questions about academic integrity at the top of a research system that is already riven with misconduct allegations. +
This fictional case is about the communication between a head of a lab, a research manager and a researcher. The researcher has a different cultural background, and interprets the communication differently. +
The Code of Ethics for CAS researchers (Articles I - V) includes framework principles of good conduct in science, seeking to support desirable moral standards in academic research. +
D
This resource is structured following the journey you will go through, from thinking of a research question to writing up and dealing with your dissertation after submission. Keep in mind that this resource has been designed to suit all students from the University, and so there may be sections that are more or less relevant to your specific discipline. Additionally, this is only a starting point to get you thinking about your dissertation +
Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB) is a joint service of OAPEN, OpenEdition, CNRS and Aix-Marseille Université. It aims to help scholars and students discover academic books. The directory is open to all publishers of academic, peer reviewed books in Open Access. +
The Code aims to ensure credibility, integrity and thereby quality in Danish research through common principles and standards for responsible conduct of research. The Code is aimed at both public and private research institutions, including universities, the research council system, foundations and enterprises. It is a common framework meant to be implemented and developed across all research fields. +
In line with international and European efforts to expand the reach of Open Access, the Danish Ministry of Education and Research has also made Open Access a priority. While most Danish research institutions are already aware of and comply with this model, this strategy aims to streamline and co-ordinate the efforts of different stakeholders to maximize research impact and improve access. +
This is a hypothetical scenario of a junior researcher who discovers gaps between previously kept records of lab data and what has been published. The scenario poses the question of whether the student researcher should report these inconsistencies or not, and how should he proceed.
The American Society of Physics poses the following question and encourages critical discussion: 'Is this really a case of misconduct in handling data and record keeping? Or, is it the result of an honest mistake?' Several alternative scenarios of why such inconsistencies can occur are discussed. +
The revised European Code of Conduct on Research Integrity outlines a number of recommendations on "Data Practices and Management". These are:
" • Researchers, research institutions and organisations ensure appropriate stewardship and curation of all data and research materials, including unpublished ones, with secure preservation for a reasonable period.
• Researchers, research institutions and organisations ensure access to data is as open as possible, as closed as necessary, and where appropriate in line with the FAIR Principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Re-usable) for data management.
• Researchers, research institutions and organisations provide transparency about how to access or make use of their data and research materials.
• Researchers, research institutions and organisations acknowledge data as legitimate and citable products of research.
• Researchers, research institutions and organisations ensure that any contracts or agreements relating to research outputs include equitable and fair provision for the management of their use, ownership, and/or their protection under intellectual property rights."'"`UNIQ--ref-0000069C-QINU`"'
These recommendations emphasize the importance of good data management and stewardship, however they need to be further specified in individual country or disciplinary contexts. +
Data Practices, Data Management and FAIR Principles: An Educational Scenario by the EnTIRE project +
Members of The Embassy of Good Science have developed a set of eight scenarios for educational purposes and to stimulate strategic thinking about issues in research ethics and research integrity.
This scenario presents a hypothetical narrative concerning '''[https://zenodo.org/record/4063648#.X3cHCpNKjxQ data practices and data management and their links with research ethics and research integrity]'''.
It focuses on issues regarding:
*Data protection and consent;
*FAIR principles for data management and stewardship;
*Data copyright and data citation;
*Data for personal research use.
It is interspersed with questions and resource suggestions that help guide researchers, research ethics committees ('RECs'), research integrity offices ('RIOs') and research administrators in their deliberations concerning the research integrity issues raised by the narrative. +
This toolkit is a collection of resources for working across jurisdictions regarding data privacy and security in the global pandemic such as COVID-19. It contains the practice notes, checklists, guides, documents, articles, blogs, etc. related to public health emergency and disaster preparedness topics. +
Professor Esser conducted a long study of Ethiopian immigrant women. It took her a long time to earn the trust of her participants and some of her notes are in Amharic. After she publishes her results, another researcher requests access to her notes. The case study asks whether Professor Esser should share the notes and how her relationship to the research subjects and the language in which the notes were written should influence her decision. +
Jose Coronado conducts a study which requires him to archive data for future reuse and which assumes that subjects might be re-interviewed in the future. He is worried that this might make less likely that his subjects will agree to take part. The case study asks how Coronado should discuss with his research subjects about the future of their data. +
A team led by Angela Beringer leads a long term research projects and publish a paper before they finish collecting all data for the project. A grad student involved in the project also publishes a dissertation on the basis of the data. Afterwards, a different researcher asks for access to the data relating to the published work as he wants to check their results and criticise their assumptions about the missing data. The case study asks whether Angela's team can withhold the data until they present their further analyis, and whether they can protect the integrity of their research by withholding data +
Professor Stillwell is asked by another researcher to share his data from a project on family ties about the homeless. Stillwell is worried that this would violate consent of participants (as they were not informed that their data could be reused) and could lead to their identification. The case study asks about the appropriate safeguards regarding the participants' consent. +
A graduate student finds out there is a significant gap in the data that her research group has published on. The data are unaccounted for in the lab-book. +
A paper was submitted to our journal. The managing editor was concerned about patient information in the paper and queried the authors. The authors responded that the data were collected from routine samples and so consent was never obtained. The patients were lost to follow-up, and there was no ethics committee approval as it involved the study of existing data, but they did discuss with the institutional review board who said it was exempt.
The cohort was 2500 patients, all with one syndrome, in one hospital. The paper contains two tables that display data from 12 patients: sex, age, presenting symptom, as well as laboratory parameters and outcome. +
An author submitted two manuscripts to our journal and the data were clearly fabricated, which was confirmed when we examined the original patient data files. The lead author admitted that they had only recruited a few patients and fabricated all of the remaining data and said that the co-authors had done this without their knowledge.
We reported this to the institution, who conducted an investigation. However, this investigation exonerated the lead author from misconduct, who went on to publish one of these manuscripts elsewhere and is still publishing suspicious manuscripts in other journals. +
This online training is designed for young researchers and students and is intended for self-pace learning. It provides information on data management, selection, collection, handling, analysis, publication and reporting as well as ownership. The aim of this module is to promote RCR. It does not provide any advices or recommendations on ethical and moral dilemmas that researchers can face in their work. +
The aim of this short checklist is to help researchers in managing and sharing their data. With the list of questions, you can easily identify and apply the best practices in the process of data planning, documenting, formating, storing, sharing as well as in confidentiality, ethics, consent and copyright issues. +
A journal received an enquiry from a reader stating that they had found some discrepancies in the spectra published in the electronic supporting information for a published paper. They suggested that the discrepancies would be consistent with the spectra being manually ‘cleaned’. If this were true, the characterisation and purity of the compounds reported in the paper would be called into question.
The editor checked the spectra in close detail and verified that the discrepancies that the reader had identified were a reasonable cause for concern. The editor also checked the author’s related papers in the journal and identified a total of four papers that were affected by similar discrepancies in the spectra. When the editor contacted the lead author to discuss the concerns, they explained that ‘cleaning’ spectra to remove impurity peaks was not a practice that was carried out by their research group, and they did not believe that it had occurred in this instance. However, the researcher who had carried out the analysis had now left the group and the original data files where no longer available.
As a comparison with the original data files could not be made, the journal approached an independent expert to obtain a second opinion on the evidence available in the published spectra. The expert confirmed that there was clear evidence that the spectra had been altered and that this could be consistent with an attempt to overestimate the yields for the reported reactions.
Following this, the journal contacted the director of the institute to request their assistance in determining whether the spectra had in fact been altered. The director consulted with the lead author and the head of their facility. They confirmed that it was not possible to locate the original data due to a limitation of their archival system. They stated that their internal review had not found any ‘intentional altering of the spectra’. They stated that on that basis, the papers should not be suspected and should be allowed to stand.
This recommendation runs contrary to the evidence that we believe can be seen in the spectra, but in the absence of the original data files it is difficult to make a conclusive judgement.
This study explored the issues of data sharing and dual-use practices. The authors concluded that it is important to support the openness and freedom of research and also to be cautious with regard to dual-use and aware of the obligation to share the data. +
In this exercise you discover the value of, and differences between, debate and dialogue. The exercise is based on the premise that dialogue and dialogical skills are indispensable for reflection and deliberation processes in general, and for research integrity in particular. Participants experience the different types of interaction and reflection produced by debate and dialogue. +
This exercise helps trainers to develop their own, and other's, dialogical skills. The exercise is based on the premise that dialogue and dialogical skills are indispensable for reflection and deliberation processes in general, and for research integrity in particular. In learning how to facilitate this exercise, you will be able to:
*Conduct a dialogue and know how to support/encourage the use of dialogue as a tool for reflection processes.
*Foster reflection in others by means of experiential learning;
The exercise can also be used as an ice-breaker before using more in-depth reflection tools or exercises. +
Watch this interactive video, which explains the difference between debate and dialogue! +
Die Übung hilft Trainer:innen, sich in ihrer Fähigkeit, Dialoge zu führen, zu entwickeln – und andere in dieser Entwicklung zu unterstützen. Die Übung basiert auf der Annahme, dass die Fähigkeit, einen Dialog und eine Debatte zu führen, unverzichtbar ist, für Reflexions- und Abwägungsprozesse im Allgemeinen sowie für Research Integrity-Themen im Besonderen. Indem du lernst, die Übung durchzuführen, wirst du dazu befähigt ...
* Einen Dialog zu führen und andere darin zu unterstützen/sie zu motivieren, den Dialog als Werkzeug für Reflexionprozesse zu nutzen
* Reflexionsprozesse in anderen zu fördern, in dem sie die Wirkung des Werkzeugs “Dialog” selbst erfahren
Diese Übung kann auch gut als Einstieg genutzt werden, um sich für komplexere Reflexionsprozesse und Übungen “aufzuwärmen”. +
In dieser Übung entdeckst du den Nutzen einer Debatte und eines Dialogs, und was der Unterschied dazwischen ist. Die Übung basiert auf der Annahme, dass die Fähigkeit, einen Dialog und eine Debatte zu führen, unverzichtbar ist, für Reflexions- und Abwägungsprozesse im Allgemeinen sowie für Research Integrity-Themen im Besonderen. Die Teilnehmenden erfahren, inwiefern eine Debatte und ein Dialog zu unterschiedlichen Formen der Interaktion und Reflexion führen. +
While many guidelines and regulations are in place prohibiting research misconduct by researchers, research participants can also fabricate or falsify their data or testimonies. A study by Devine et. al. conducted in 2013 researched whether research subjectes who had enrolled in multiple studies were prone to conceal or exaggerate personal information in order to qualify for inclusion criteria of a study.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000194-QINU`"' Three quarters of the research subjects were found to engage in some form of deception, such as having been enrolled in a previous study, concealing health symptoms or not reporting medication. One likely reason for participants' deception is the financial compensation for enrolling in a study.
'"`UNIQ--references-00000195-QINU`"' +
The Declaration of Geneva is a medical code of ethics that highlights the humanitarian character of the physicians' profession and the field of medicine. Although it was first established in 1948, a new version of the Declaration of Geneva was adopted by the World Medical Association (WMA) General Assembly on October 14, 2017, in Chicago. +
Declaration of Helsinki - Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. Developed by the World Medical Association in 1964, the Declaration of Helsinki is a fundamental document on biomedical research that works as a code of research ethics and provides principles to protect human subjects in biomedical research. +
The Declaration of Istanbul on Organ Trafficking and Transplant Tourism is a guiding instrument for professionals, policymakers, health authorities, and societies to maximize the benefits of organ transplantation and to develop programs to prevent unethical activities like organ trafficking.<br /> +
This is a fictional case of a novice reviewer who, in writing her first book review, used her own substantive ideas but relied heavily on borrowing identical sentences and phrases from a professor’s published review. The professor whose review has been heavily plagiarised alerted the journal. +
İkinci (yüz yüze) grup oturumunda eğitmenler eğitimin genel bir özetini yapacak, katılımcıların alıştırmaları uygularken edindikleri deneyimler üzerine fikir yürütmelerini sağlayacak ve katılımcılar seçilmiş olan birkaç alıştırmayı tekrar uygularken onları denetleyeceklerdir. Bu oturum, eğitimi alan kişilerin:
1) Araştırma doğruluğuna erdem temelli yaklaşımı anlamalarını,
2) Alıştırmaların bir kısmını kolaylaştırıcı olarak tekrardan uygulamalarını,
3) Eğitimi, alıştırmaları kolaylaştırıcı olarak yönetmek hususunda kendilerine güvenerek tamamlamalarını,
4) Alıştırmaların spesifik hedeflerini ve bunların eğitimin genel hedeflerine yaptığı katkıları öğrenmelerini,
5) Eğitim materyallerini kendi çalışma ortamlarının gerekliliklerine göre uyarlamanın mümkün olduğunu fark etmelerini,
6) Böyle bir eğitimi organize ederken ilgili materyalleri ve desteği nerden ve nasıl bulabileceklerini öğrenmelerini sağlamayı amaçlamaktadır. +
İkinci (yüz yüze) grup oturumunda katılımcılar son kez bir araya gelip eğitimin içeriği ve kolaylaştırıcı olarak alıştırmaları uygularken edindikleri deneyimler üzerine fikir yürüteceklerdir. Bu oturumda katılımcılar özellikle:
1) Araştırma doğruluğuna erdem temelli yaklaşıma ilişkin anlayışları ve insanların araştırmayla ilgili fikir ve eylemlerinde erdem etiği yaklaşımını nasıl etkin hale getirebilecekleri üzerine fikir yürüteceklerdir.
2) Alıştırmaların bir kısmını kolaylaştırıcı olarak tekrardan uygulayacak ve iki yüz yüze oturum arasında kafalarında oluşan şüphe ve sorular üzerinde duracaklardır.
3) Alıştırmaların spesifik hedeflerini ve bunların eğitimin genel hedeflerine yaptığı katkıları gözden geçirecek ve bu konuda fikir yürüteceklerdir.
4) Eğitim materyallerini kendi çalışma ortamlarının gerekliliklerine göre uyarlamanın mümkün olup olmadığı üzerine fikir yürüteceklerdir.
5) Böyle bir eğitimi organize ederken ilgili materyalleri ve desteği nerden ve nasıl bulabileceklerini öğreneceklerdir. +
Diese Übung basiert auf der Annahme, dass es nicht immer klar ist, wie Research Integrity in bestimmten Situationen gewährleitet werden kann, und dass es nicht immer offensichtlich ist, wie tugendhaftes Verhalten aussieht, wenn im Forschungsalltag Research Integrity gefährdet ist. +
Diese Übung ist inspiriert von der aristotelischen Philosophie. Sie hilft den Teilnehmenden, sich kritisch mit den Nuancen der praktischen Bedeutung abstrakter Research Integrity-Werte und Tugenden in ihrem Forschungsalltag auseinanderzusetzen. Die Übung basiert auf der Annahme, dass nicht immer klar ist, was Research Integrity in einer konkreten Situation bedeutet. Durch die Übung fördern Trainer:innen Reflexion über Werte, die mit Research Integrity zusammenhängen (wie z.B. Mut, Verantwortlichkeit, Ehrlichkeit). Die Teilnehmenden reflektieren, welche Werte und Tugenden mit Research Integrity in Verbindung gebracht werden und welche konkreten Verhaltensweisen daraus abgeleitet werden können. Tugendhaftes Verhalten wird oft als zwischen zwei Extremen liegend beschrieben. Diese Extreme gelten im Allgemeinen als Laster. Die Übung verschafft einen kritischen Blick auf die praktische, nuancierte Bedeutung der Werte in Zusammenhang mit Research Integrity im Forschungsalltag und hilft Teilnehmenden, tugendhafte (mithin gute und situativ angemessene) Verhaltensweisen zu identifizieren. +
Der SDA – Selbstauskunfts-Ansatz – ist eine Übung mit dem Ziel, in einem Workshop-Setting Reflexion über Research Integrity anzuregen. Dabei wird die Frage „Was ist das überhaupt, wenn etwas ''gut ''ist und wie könnten verschiedene Formen des Guten kategorisiert werden?“ als Ausgangspunkt benutzt. Mithilfe eines Selbstauskunfts-Arbeitsblattes werden Gedanken und intuitive Reaktionen der Teilnehmenden zum Konzept des Guten gesammelt. Diese Antworten sind für die Übung von besonderer Bedeutung. Auf dem Arbeitsblatt können die Gedanken der Teilnehmenden zum Thema ''des Guten ''sowie ihre Definition davon und ihre persönlichen Erfahrungen mit dem Thema festgehalten werden. +
Diese Übung soll zum Nachdenken über Research Integrity in einem Workshop-Setting anregen. Die Frage „Was ist ''gut ''and wie können verschiedene Arten des Guten kategorisiert werden?“ dient als Ausgangspunkt für die Übung. Das Herzstück der Übung ist die Diskussion darüber, auf welche unterschiedlichen Arten Forschung ''gut'' sein kann und auf der Reflexion des Konzepts des Guten in der Forschung. Die Übung ist inspiriert von einer etwas allgemeineren Methode, dem Selbstauskunfts-Ansatz (self declaration approach, SDA). Dieser Ansatz nutzt die individuellen Antworten der Teilnehmenden auf einem Selbstreflexionsbogen, um die Reflexion über ein spezifisches Research Integrity-Thema zu strukturieren. Das Besondere an diesem Ansatz ist, dass die Gedanken und Intuitionen der Teilnehmenden in die Diskussion integriert werden. Diese Methode ist flexibel anwendbar und auf verschiedene Research Integrity-Themen sowie unterschiedliche Zielgruppen anpassbar. +
The study discusses an engineering ethics course which was included at Shantou University (STU) in 2008, within a Conceive-Design-Implement-Operate (CDIO) curriculum in China. The course included three issues important for China: engineers' social obligations, intellectual property and engineering safety criteria. Although, as authors emphasized, the assessment of the course's impact on students has its limitations, this effort is perceived as a positive step to sustain the CDIO reform of STU. +
This study examined the design of online training modules in molecular biology education that were part of a "boot camp" for high school biology teachers in Hawaii. The aim of this educational program was to prepare science teachers to navigate successfully their students' activities to conduct medical research in laboratory. The participants, a group of 29 teachers, reported that these online materials were useful and valuable for their future work with students. +
This article describes an activity that uses informed consent procedure in order to help students understand the responsibilities of participants in research. This activity helps researchers link students' participation to their classroom experiences. +
As thinking and practice has grown around ethical research involving children, so too has the need to train and equip new researchers with relevant knowledge and the associated mindsets. However, developing a comprehensive training program on ethical research involving children can be a complex task. When I (Daniella Bendo) took up an Assistant Professor position at King’s University College (at Western University) Canada last year, I developed a third-year undergraduate unit entitled, ‘Researching Childhood (in Childhood and Social Institutions).’ The ERIC materials were invaluable in providing an established, rights-based framework for the course, as well as a wealth of material and resources to draw upon in the lectures and tutorials. In terms of assessment, I sought a way to draw the students’ learning together and ask them to demonstrate their theoretical and practical understanding of ethical issues in research involving children, in what was, otherwise, a theoretical unit. Based on the many real-life case studies on the ERIC website, I set students the assignment of developing their own hypothetical case study. Here, one of our students, Paige Sheridan, shares the approach she took with this assignment. The depth of her ethical understanding is evident in the reflexive detail of her case study and, while hypothetical, the five-step process she describes would likely be a useful tool to consider in research practice. +
International declarations such as the Hong Kong principles and the San Francisco Declaration of Research Assessment (DORA) aim to foster research integrity among the global research community <sup>1, 2</sup>. At the European level, the European Code of Conduct (ECoC) is a research integrity document that aims to harmonize the research integrity standards across Europe <sup> 3</sup>. In addition, many individual European countries have developed their own national guidance detailing the principles and practices of research integrity and addressing instances of research misconduct. This theme page describes the development and value of these national research integrity codes in Europe. +
This study aimed to describe the development, testing and formative evaluation of nine role-play scenarios for teaching responsible conduct of research (RCR) to graduate students in science and engineering. Students reported that these role-play scenarios provided deeper understanding of the topic than a lecture or a case study. +
This study addresses the need for professional development opportunities for persons with research, clinical or administrative duties and also a shortage of evaluations of ethics programs and curricula. The authors surveyed hygiene, epidemiology and microbiology professionals who attended 7 ethics courses. The study showed that most attendees demonstrated increased knowledge in research and public health ethics, which affirmed the importance of such training activities. +
Dialogue is a vehicle for reaching understanding and learning from each other. Dialogue is to be distinguished from debate. Dialogue focuses on listening to the other and being open to the other’s perspective, whereas debate aims at convincing the other through argumentation. +
Digital Trespass: Ethical and Terms-of-Use Violations by Researchers Accessing Data From an Online Patient Community +
This article presents four cases regarding ethical and terms-of-use violations by researchers who carry out social media studies in an online patient research network. The authors offer potential strategies that can be adopted in order to avoid these violations. +
During the workshop, the guests are asked to reflect on their own experiences and practices, while discussing the cases presented, and to share views on how to promote and foster a culture of best scientific practices. The event is organised under the motto of a “dinner” event, where first there will be an Amuse for guests to know each other. Then, Starters will be served, where guests will be presented with three starters (cases) to choose and discuss one or the three. Four Main Courses (video-scenes) will be individually offered to guests to taste (watch) and share their opinions about them (food for thought discussion). And because “dessert goes to your heart and not to your belly”, this dinner could not have finished without a sweet moment of the day to enjoy (inspiring thoughts to end)!
[[File:Diner pensant video.png|center|frame|Here you can watch the introductory video: [https://youtu.be/Jb1mFJL1m2g Diner Pensant - Tasteful conversations to empower good practices in science]]]
This course was developed by Mariette vd Hoven, Miriam van Loon, Marijn Prakke, Paulo Gomes, Julio Berlido Santos and PJ Wall. +
Regarding a case in which a researcher at VU Amsterdam was alleged to have failed to disclose fully his conflicts of interest in publications, scientific advice and a research proposal, there was a disagreement between the institutional research integrity committee and The Netherlands Board on Research Integrity ('LOWI') concerning the application of the assessment framework that relates to conflicts of interests. According to the institutional research integrity committee, although failure to disclose relevant secondary interests is a case of negligence, it does not imply that the primary obligation to ensure reliable academic practice has been violated. This meant that the institutional research integrity committee determined that the behaviour of the researcher could not be reviewed under the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Academic Practice. The LOWI disagreed with this interpretation. This is a factual anonymized case. +
The case describes a scenario where a young researcher, during his interview for a new much-desired career post and whilst in a subsequent post-interview informal chat, is ‘pushed’ towards sharing unpublished findings and/or details of his current research team’s work. +
Dr Donnelly wants to publish a paper on the basis of her research conducted for and funded by a private company. The company agrees, but asks not to be mentioned in the paper. The case study asks whether the researcher should agree to this condition. +
Professor O'Meare published a translation of a previously unknown manuscript, but it is later brought to her attention that her claims (presented in the introduction) about the historical circumstances surrounding the manuscript and its potential influence are likely untrue. The case study asks what Professor O'Meara should do in this situation. +
Three researchers put forth an equal amount of effort on a research project resulting in a dispute over who the primary author should be. +
A paper was given the chance for correction, following detection of errors in data coding and therefore in results. Such mistakes often mean that papers are retracted. This is a factual case. +
Yüz yüze ya da konferans görüşmesi şeklinde gerçekleştirilecek olan katılımlı oturumlarda, eğitim alan diğer katılımcılar ve eğitmenlerinizle birlikte olacaksınız. Bu oturumlarda online derslerin içeriği üzerine yorumlamalarda bulunacak ve bu derslerde edindiğiniz bilgileri, eğitmen(ler) tarafından yönlendirilecek olan grup alıştırmaları esnasında uygulamayla birleştireceksiniz.
Alıştırmalar sırasında kendi deneyimleriniz üzerine fikir yürütmeye yönlendirilecek ve, diğer katılımcılarla diyalog halinde, (gerçek) ahlaki ikilemler ile ilgili ahlaki değerlendirmeler yapacak ve bu ikilemlere karşılık olarak erdemli yanıtlar geliştireceksiniz.
Ayrıca, eğitmen olarak rolünüze, her bir alıştırmanın didaktiğine ve bunları kendi çalışma ortamınızda nasıl öğreteceğinize odaklanarak başkalarında aynı yorumlama ve fikir yürütme süreçlerini nasıl geliştireceğinizi öğreneceksiniz. +
İlk oturumlarda temel hedef, karma öğrenme programının yüz yüze/ katılımlı bölümünü oluşturan beş alıştırmaya ilişkin bilgiler vermek ve eğitimi alan kişileri bu alıştırmaları kolaylaştırıcı olarak yönetmeye hazırlamaktır.
Bu oturumlara katılan kişiler:
1- Alıştırmaları kullanarak kendi uygulamaları üzerine fikir yürütmeyi ve yorumlamalarda bulunmayı öğreneceklerdir.
2- Her bir alıştırma için belirlenen öğrenme hedeflerini gerçekleştireceklerdir.
3- Alıştırmaları kolaylaştırıcı olarak yönetmenin nasıl bir şey olduğu konusunda fikir sahibi olacaklardır.
4- Alıştırmaları kolaylaştırıcı olarak yönetebilmek için yapmaları ya da öğrenmeleri gereken şeyler üzerine fikir yürüteceklerdir. +
This textbook is a guide to RCR in the global cotext. It contains guidelines on responsible research, addressing a wide spectrum of issues related to research responsibility while using examples from different disciplines. +
A PhD student has excellent research results in a collaborative setting. Upon request of her supervisor, she submits their research for publication as the submitting author.
After a few weeks, the supervisor approaches the student and suggests to submit the manuscript at another journal where the submission process will be easier. The supervisor suggests they could always retract one of the two submissions if it were to be doubly accepted. +
In 2018 SAGE retracted 10 papers which had been published in ''Advances in Mechanical Engineering.'' The journal states the peer review process was flawed. Once the papers were scrutinized by new reviewers the articles tecnical errors in the data was discovered.'"`UNIQ--ref-000001D3-QINU`"' The published papers were of unsatisfactory quality and were eventually, retracted. However, [https://retractionwatch.com/ Retraction Watch] speculated the reason for [https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:4d29ae67-bee8-4203-b78f-320bc63025d0 retraction] being the discovery of the peer review of all 10 papers being fake.'"`UNIQ--ref-000001D4-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-000001D5-QINU`"' +
In order to maintain high standards of research integrity, allegations of misconduct are taken seriously at the Dublin City University (DCU). This document lays down detailed procedural guidelines for the reporting, investigation and resolution of cases of research misconduct. +
This concise position statement aims to increase the availability and visibility of research output from the Dublin City University (DCU) by encouraging adherence to the principles of open access. Researchers are also directed to self-archive their publications in the university repository (DORAS). +
A paper had been published in a less known journal in the boundaries of a specific country as well as submitted to an international journal. The paper was later on retracted. +
The National Survey on Research Integrity (NSRI) is the first-ever nation-wide online survey targeting researchers of all universities and university medical centres in The Netherlands. NSRI aims to report on factors that promote or hinder Responsible Research Practices (RRPs). These factors cover for instance perceptions of organizational justice, scientific norms, work pressure, mentoring, and social support. It is possible that these factors play different roles in different disciplinary fields: biomedical, natural and engineering sciences, social sciences, and the humanities. Similarly, the importance of the factors may vary over the career stages of a researcher. The NSRI is designed to be large enough to look separately at subgroups.
The survey will also report on the prevalence of RRPs, Questionable Research Practices (QRPs) and research misconduct (defined as falsification and fabrication) in each of the four disciplinary fields and across three academic ranks. Because of its unique [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vvcaziHteAI methodology] and its nationwide target of approximately 40,000 researchers across all disciplinary fields, NSRI can provide solid data to identify driving factors that promote or hinder RRP. +
The newsblog presents the case of a social psychology researcher who was investigated for allegations of data fabrication. The researcher has had more than 3 dozens of publications retracted, received reduced salaries, was ordered to do community work and had to return his PhD. +
This is a fictional case of a graduate research assistant’s dilemma of raising his suspicions of data duplication in a professor’s team under whose grant he works. +
E
This online glossary of European Network for Academic Integrity contains a large list of words related to research integrity. Its content is available in ten languages. +
The ENERI Classroom is an online training and capacity-building platform for research integrity and ethics. The Classroom provides open access to training materials for research integrity and research ethics experts, such as members of research integrity offices and research ethics committees. Most training materials are suitable for online self-learning as well as online or onsite group-learning guided by a facilitator.
The ENERI Classroom addresses four main topics:
*Research integrity
*Research ethics
*Overlapping issues
*Developing infrastructures
Each topic is divided into several learning units so that both learners and teachers can focus on issues they consider particularly important.
The topic ''research integrity'' includes learning units on:
*Research integrity boards and codes of conducts
*Research integrity principles
*Violations of research integrity
*Plagiarism
*Authorship
*Peer review
*Dealing with violations and allegations of misconduct
*Whistleblowing and whistleblower protection
*Mentoring for stronger cultures of integrity.
The topic ''research ethics'' includes learning units on:
*Research ethics committees: main tasks and challenges
*Core principles of research ethics
*Research involving vulnerable groups
*Research in emergency situations
*Biobanks
*Specific aspects of clinical drug trials
*Ethics review in non-medical fields.
The topic ''overlapping issues'' includes learning units on:
*Conflict of interest
*Data protection
*Social responsibility
*Open science
*Mentoring for stronger cultures of integrity.
The topic ''developing infrastructures'' describes crucial components of effective research integrity and research ethics infrastructures and provides guidance on what to consider when introducing new elements to existing research integrity and research ethics systems. In this way, the Classroom shows how countries, regions or institutions wishing to improve their research integrity and research ethics infrastructures can address challenges in a systematic manner.
Each learning unit is structured as follows:
*Learning objectives and introduction
*Key issues
*Regulations and guidelines
*Cases & questions
*Resources
The ENERI Decision Tree is an online tool intended to help researchers, members of research ethics committees (RECs) and research integrity officers to anticipate, reflect and address ethical questions and challenges that might arise before, during or after a research project. Thus, the ENERI Decision Tree aims to facilitate responsible conduct of research throughout all phases of the research process. Moreover, it seeks to support the work of RECs and research integrity offices (RIOs) by providing guidance on how to respond to research ethics and research integrity challenges. +
This e-manual on research integrity and ethics is intended for researchers and peer-reviewers. It does not provide instructions, but aims to encourage reflections on these issues. +
The manual is a resource for both researchers designing or attempting to design research, as well as professionals evaluating that research. It offers tools for practical guidance for researchers, research ethics committees and research integrity offices. +
Case studies collection +
The EOSC-Future/RDA Artificial Intelligence and Data Visitation Working Group (AIDV-WG) has focused on addressing ethical, legal, and social challenges of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Data Visitation (DV) affecting of state-of-the art data technology impacting scientific exchange in the context of data sharing and the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC).
'''Mission:''' The mission of the AIDV is to contribute to building the ethical, legal, social, and technical frameworks and bridges enabling the open sharing and re-use of data in the framework of Open Science.
'''Vision:''' The vision of the AIDV is to bring together expertise across disciplines and regions to ensure ameliorate the use of AI and DV in research and innovation across technologies and sectors to address the grand challenges of society.
'''Objectives''' The principal objective of AIDV is to examine the promises, challenges, and barriers to the use of AI in data sharing and Open Science having regard to scientists and research institutions as well as to policy and the interests of patients, communities, health advocates, and those stakeholders otherwise underrepresented in these important initiatives for Open Science.
Working to support the EOSC Future project and facilitate the implementation of EOSC across research communities, this AIDV examines interoperability issues arising across federated and non-federated systems. Particular attention is given to national and institutional policies (ethics/legal) and how they affect the generation of metadata and interdisciplinary work and cooperation.
The following work packages are being pursued by AIDV subteams:
· '''A survey''' on current ethical, legal, policy, and societal frameworks for AI and DV
· '''Guidance on legal considerations''' for AI and DV: a mapping of legal considerations for AI and DV as well as how to navigate legal frameworks for users of EOSC and other Open Science platforms.
· '''Guidance for informed consent''' in AI and DV: The GDPR and other EU data and AI regulations as well as regulations in other jurisdictions have placed heavy emphasis on the role of informed consent in data sharing and data publication. This subteam examines the role of informed consent in AI and DV, addressing fundamental challenges to current informed consent frameworks and practices. The aim is to provide guidance for researchers and data controllers across disciplines regarding informed consent in AI and DV.
· '''Guidance for ethics committees''' reviewing AI and DV: Ethics committees (RECs/IRBs/IECs) have been confronted by new challenges when encountering the need for advice on data management and data sharing as well as in other areas of data processing. The use of AI and DV, especially in health-related research, requires investigation regarding the ethical, legal, and social issues these raise for ethics committees and those submitting proposals for advice/approval to ethics committees. This subteam's guidance will assist ethics committees in understanding questions, methods, and procedures for reviewing AI and DV.
· '''AI Bill of Rights''': Underlying the growing application and use of AI and DV is a concern to ensure that data subjects are protected by these new technologies. The AIDV-WG subteam is drafting an RDA AI Bill of Rights that promotes fundamental human rights Recommendations Communique that advances trust in AI and federated systems for Open Science.
The EQIPD consortium developed a Quality System for preclinical research to boost innovation. +
An ethics governance system for the use of responsible research and innovation (RRI) in higher education, funding and research centres +
This case is about intelectual property rights and conflict of interests in responsible conduct of research. A long-standing rapport with an independent company has status and financial perk for a university researcher. Before the company signs a contract with the researcher’s university, the company asks the researcher to waive his intellectual property rights. The researcher concedes against the wishes of the university. +
This short text addresses different types of limitations of a study and offers advices how to report them. +
The aim of the study was to identify the best educational practices related to the responsible conduct of clinical research (RCCR) with American Society for Bioethics and Humanities (ASBH) members as participants. Research findings suggest that there is a need for investments in RCCR training, studying outcomes as well as development of mechanisms to ensure the quality of instruction. +
This study describes a preliminary assessment of the effectiveness of a short-term course in responsible conduct of research (RCR). It shows that there is no significant tendency toward improvements in ethical decision-making skills and attitudes about the importance of RCR training. +
Judith Levy was conducting a study about ways of reducing drug-use and HIV transmission when two of her reserach subjects kidnapped their child from a shelter. As a result, the media, FBI and the police started interfering with the project and undermining the subjects' confidentiality. The case study asks about the proper course of action in such situations and the extent to which researchers can protect their sources. +
This tool ranks journals based on the Eigenfactor Score and then colors the them accordingly. It helps users to quickly identify high influential journals. +
This checklist is intended for authors to help them in the process of publication of their papers. It follows the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' (ICMJE) policies and recommendations. +
This tool for educators provides information on RRI terminology and how to implement them into educational system. It also introduces three RRI principles for higher education: Education for Society, Education with Society and Education to whole persons. These three principles also give guidance how to develop RRI competences among students and to facilitate the topic to educators, the tool provides five case study materials. +
This article describes institutional approaches for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) training requirement in the responsible conduct of research (RCR). The information provided by the authors will be valuable for institutions and researchers who are developing or improving training programs. +
Two papers in an environmental journal were retracted following investigations on claims that the peer-review process had been compromised. +
Epistemology is a branch of philosophy that studies the nature of knowledge and its relations to concepts and definitions of truth, belief and justification of belief.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000000-QINU`"' Virtue is often defined as moral excellence, and epistemic virtues are described as intellectual virtues. A critical, conscientious thinker, could also be described as epistemically virtuous.
'"`UNIQ--references-00000001-QINU`"' +
Bu modülde aşağıdaki konuları öğrenecek ve bu konular üzerine yorumlamalarda bulunacaksınız:
*'''<u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:520b3bc7-a6ab-4617-95f2-89c9dee31c53 Erdem etiğinin]</u> temel karakteristikleri:''' Erdem etiğine giriş niteliğinde bir video izledikten sonra erdem etiğinin konuyla ilgili karakteristiklerini özetlemeyi hedefleyen bir dizi soru yanıtlayacaksınız.
*'''<u>[https://embassy.science/wiki/Theme:17d406f9-0b0f-4325-aa2d-2fe186d5ff34 Ahlaki çatışma ve ahlaki ikilem]:</u>''' Kavramlara ilişkin bir giriş yapıldıktan sonra sizden Rotterdam Dilemma Oyunundan alınmış birisi bir ahlaki çatışma, diğeri ise bir ahlaki ikilem içeren iki vakayı analiz etmeniz ve verilen kavramları bu vakalar üzerinde uygulamanız istenecektir.
*'''Daha erdemli bir araştırmacı olma yönündeki isteğiniz:''' Modülün sonunda araştırmacı olarak genel hedefleriniz üzerine yapacağınız yorumlamaların ardından sizden, olmak (ya da dönüşmek) istediğiniz araştırmacıyı tanımlayacak en önemli üç erdemi belirlemeniz istenecektir.
*'''Ahlaki örneklerin ahlaki gelişim ve erdemleri hayata geçirme üzerindeki etkisi:''' Erdemlerin nasıl öğrenildiği ve öğretildiği ve iyi bir rol model/mentor olmanın neleri gerektirdiği üzerine yapacağınız yorumlamaların ardından sizden, örnek aldığınız bir kişinin sizi daha erdemli davranmaya yönelttiği bir durumu anlatmanız istenecektir. +
Bu alıştırma, erdemlerle ilgili kavramlar ve bu kavramların uygulamayla olan ilişkisi üzerine fikir yürütmek yoluyla insanları Araştırma Doğruluğu (AD) vakaları ve ikilemleri üzerine düşünmeye teşvik etmeyi amaçlamaktadır<sup>[2]</sup>. Alıştırmada, erdemler üzerine araştırma doğruluğu bağlamında fikir yürütülmekte ve erdemler eylem normları haline dönüştürülmektedir. Bu alıştırma erdemlerin AD için önemini ve nasıl uygulamaya dökülebileceğini anlamaya yardımcı olmaktadır. +
Bu alıştırma, erdemlerin (ya da ahlaki niteliklerin), kişisel saik ve değerlere göre nasıl davranacaklarına karar vermede araştırmacıları nasıl destekleyebileceğine odaklanarak Araştırma Doğruluğu (AD) vakaları ve ikilemleri üzerine fikir yürütmeyi teşvik etmektedir. Bu alıştırmada erdemler tanımlanmakta, bu erdemler üzerine fikir yürütülmekte ve erdemler eylem normlarına dönüştürülmektedir. Alıştırma esnasında sizden “Bu durumda dürüstlüğü sağlamak için ne yapmalıyım?” “Nasıl güvenilir olabilirim?” gibi sorular üzerinde fikir yürütmeniz istenecektir. Bu alıştırma, nasıl araştırmacılar olmak istediğimiz ve olası zorluk ve kısıtlılıklar düşünüldüğünde kusursuz davranışların neler olacağı üzerine fikir yürütmenize yardımcı olmaktadır. +
A research group publishes several papers on an important finding in high-impact journals. Months later, a new graduate student is asked to replicate this research and reproduce the findings.
The student finds he is unable to reproduce the findings, and even has an explanation for this impossibility. +
The aim of the Estonian Code of Conduct for Research Integrity is to support knowledge about, acceptance and entrenchment of research integrity in the Estonian research community. The Code of Conduct for Research Integrity describes the conduct expected from researchers and the responsibility of research institutions in ensuring research integrity, thus contributing to the increase of credibility of research in the eyes of the individual and the public'"`UNIQ--ref-00000151-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-00000152-QINU`"' +
This national code lays down the general principles of ethical scientific research. Meant for different disciplines and research areas, this code supports the development of more specific institutional or thematic guidelines. +
An anthropologist who has been "adopted" into a Native American family in the Southwest during her research periods, is obligated to look after the elders when one of them develops dementia and his children have other responsibilities. She is unable to complete her academic work but strengthens her relationship with the family. +
This document contains a list of guidelines that anthropologists should follow. These principles provide a professional code, a practical framework, to help researchers cope with ethical considerations, conflicts of interest, making informed decisions, competing duties and obligations, and communicating their professional perspectives to other stakeholders affected by their research. +
Ethical Issues in Developing Pharmacogenetic Research Partnerships With American Indigenous Communities +
This article describes two factual cases about the use of samples collected from two American indigenous communities (NuuChah-Nulth First Nation in British Columbia, Canada and Havasupai Tribe in the US) for genetic research. In both cases consent was acquired for an initial study, but later, research samples were used for other purposes that the communities had not consented to. +
Principles and standards to guide psychologists to an ethical course of action and good professional conduct. Such ethical stnadards consist on enforceable rules to guide the conduct of psychologists and cover a variety of areas: clinical psychology, counseling, school practice of psychology, research, teaching, public service, forensic activities, among others. +
Citizen science, according to the [https://www.ecsa.ngo/ European Citizen Science Association (ESCA)], is "an ‘umbrella’ term that describes a variety of ways in which the public participates in science. The main characteristics are that: (1) citizens are actively involved in research, in partnership or collaboration with scientists or professionals; and (2) there is a genuine outcome, such as new scientific knowledge, conservation action or policy change." +
This guidance document aims to help researchers to consider, examine, and address ethical issues associated with human enhancement. Human enhancement refers to a wide field of interventions and technologies that aim at improving human beings beyond what might otherwise be considered typical or average. The guidance in this document is designed to be cross-disciplinary, and not limited to a particular field of science, engineering or medicine. It aims to cover all fields in research and development (R&D) where human enhancement potential may occur. Although it has wider application, this document has been composed for Horizon Europe ethics review and it thereby also complements other documentation for the ethics review procedure in Horizon Europe. This document is intended for the following types of projects: (1) Projects in which human enhancement is an explicit aim, either through research intended to facilitate human enhancement applications, or through the development of products or techniques intended for human enhancement; (2) Projects that have unforeseen, unpredicted or unintended potential enhancement applications, by which is meant that research and/or development is undertaken for therapeutic or other non-enhancement purposes, but the results of the project also have a clear potential for human enhancement. +
This study addresses three specific issues for health educators - the student-professor relationship, joint authorship and ethics in publishing. The authors emphasize that there is no consensus regarding an accepted code of ethics for individuals in health education. They conclude that professional health educators should continue to dialogue regarding the conduct and publication of research in health education and stress the importance of collegial and student-professor relationships when conducting research. +
This is a factual case. +
This document is an addendum to the Slovak Academy of Sciences' Code of Ehtics (please refer to "Related Resources". Of note, it states taht researchers should not publish their output in untrustworthy or predatory journals. +
Ethics Framework and Guidelines for Participatory Processes in the Activities of Research Funding Organizations +
The following framework supports the ethical preparation, implementation, and evaluation of participatory processes in research funding and (applied) research & innovation (R&I). It helps the user understand the context in which they undertake a participatory process and guides them through mapping and addressing the ethical challenges and limitations that might arise. The framework was developed with a focus on the activities of research funding organizations (RFOs), including participation in strategy development and agenda setting, call topic definition and formulation, (project and proposal) evaluation processes, and R&I projects. It thus addresses different contexts, resources, and needs that impact decisions on how to conduct participatory processes in an ethical manner, and provides guidance to ensure stakeholder participation is executed without disregarding values such as fairness, transparency, equality, and privacy. Through this, it might also support future ethics review and evaluation procedures that assess the planning and implementation of participatory processes and offer a common frame of reference for different stakeholders to discuss and understand participation in R&I.
The Ethics Framework and Guidelines for Participatory Processes in the Activities of Research Funding Organizations were developed in the context of the H2020-project PRO-Ethics [grant number 872441]. The framework reflects the theoretical and empirical data and experiences collected in this time, as analyzed and synthesized by the authors of this document with support from the project consortium. The content of the document is the sole responsibility of its author(s) and any opinions expressed herein should not be taken to represent an official position of the European Commission. +
Ethics Framework and Guidelines for Participatory Processes in the Activities of Research Funding Organizations +
The following framework supports the ethical preparation, implementation, and evaluation of participatory processes in research funding and (applied) research & innovation (R&I). It helps the user understand the context in which they undertake a participatory process and guides them through mapping and addressing the ethical challenges and limitations that might arise. The framework was developed with a focus on the activities of research funding organizations (RFOs), including participation in strategy development and agenda setting, call topic definition and formulation, (project and proposal) evaluation processes, and R&I projects. It thus addresses different contexts, resources, and needs that impact decisions on how to conduct participatory processes in an ethical manner, and provides guidance to ensure stakeholder participation is executed without disregarding values such as fairness, transparency, equality, and privacy. Through this, it might also support future ethics review and evaluation procedures that assess the planning and implementation of participatory processes and offer a common frame of reference for different stakeholders to discuss and understand participation in R&I.
The Ethics Framework and Guidelines for Participatory Processes in the Activities of Research Funding Organizations were developed in the context of the H2020-project PRO-Ethics [grant number 872441]. The framework reflects the theoretical and empirical data and experiences collected in this time, as analyzed and synthesized by the authors of this document with support from the project consortium. The content of the document is the sole responsibility of its author(s) and any opinions expressed herein should not be taken to represent an official position of the European Commission. +
Ethics Framework and Guidelines for Participatory Processes in the Activities of Research Funding Organizations +
This framework supports the ethical preparation, implementation, and evaluation of participatory processes in research funding and (applied) research & innovation (R&I). It helps the user understand the context in which they undertake a participatory process and guides them through mapping and addressing the ethical challenges and limitations that might arise.
The framework addresses different contexts, resources, and needs that impact decisions on how to conduct participatory processes in an ethical manner for Research Funding Organisations (RFOs), and provides guidance to ensure stakeholder participation is executed without disregarding values such as fairness, transparency, equality, and privacy. +
This article proposes the use of the Ethics Requirement Score, a bibliometric index, in scientific healthcare journals for evaluating ethics criteria in scientific publication. +
The paper discusses several instances in the past where research ethics requirements - protecting the rights of children participants - were not adequately followed. +
This glossary aims at providing common ground for enlightened conversation in the realm of ethics and leadership. More than 50 animated two-minute videos define key ethics terms and behavioral ethics concepts. +
The document ''Ethics in Social Sciences and Humanities'' was developed by the European Commission with the specific aim to help researchers working in the social sciences and humanities (SSH). The document addresses particular ethical issues that SSH researchers face in preparing and performing research. Topics covered include methodology, informed consent, unexpected findings, data protection, research sites, misuse of research, ethical approval and management issues. +
This article provides advices how to cope with ethical issues that may occur during research. The authors present a framework, describe a methodology and provide with two examples from educational research.
<br /> +
Ageing is a fundamental principle of our life and it is going to be more and more subject of medical researches around the world. The needed to examine ageing from an ethic point of view is necessary to understand how researchers should approach to this theme in the respect of human principles.
Recently, with development of research, is becoming a limitation to look at ageing as something that happens only when one is old, thereby ignoring the fact that ageing is a process to which all the people are subject, and that the ageing person is treated as an object in ethical discourse rather than as its subject. Define the potential of research in this field is fundamental to understand how deeply human intervention can go on a process defined as natural until today, as aging is'"`UNIQ--ref-000004CD-QINU`"'. +
More than 50 case studies match ethics concepts to real world situations. From journalism to performing arts to foreign policy to scientific research to social work, these cases explore a range of current and historic ethical dilemmas, their motivating biases, and their consequences. +
This fictional case describes the human rights and ethical implications of vaccine trials in low-income communities and countries. Two short, fictional scenarios are analysed from both perspectives. The case revolves around two key points: the informed consent and comprehension of the research by the potential participants and the question to what extend persuasion by the trail conductor is justifiable.
'"`UNIQ--references-000001BA-QINU`"' +
The European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology is an association of more than 11,000 clinicians, researchers and allied health professionals from over 50 national societies dedicated to improving the health of people affected by allergic diseases. +
The European Association of Archaeologists is a learned society for professional archaeologists in Europe and beyond, with a total of more than 15,000 members. +
The European Association of Archaeologists is a learned society for professional archaeologists in Europe and beyond, with a total of more than 15,000 members. +
European Association of Archaeologists (EAA) Principles of Conduct for Archaeologists involved in Contract Archaeological Work +
The European Association of Archaeologists is a learned society for professional archaeologists in Europe and beyond, with a total of more than 15,000 members. +
The European Association of Social Psychology aims to promote excellence in and improve the quality of social psychological research in Europe. +
The European Astronomical Society, founded in 1990, aims to promote and advance astronomy in Europe. +
The European Charter of Patients' Rights serves as an instrument for the protection of citizens and patients among different health systems in the EU. The charter aims to harmonize health systems across the EU, to ensure the equal protection of patients in each of the states, that might have very contrasting situations concerning patients' rights. +
The European College of Neuropsychopharmacology is a learned society committed to ensuring that advances in the understanding of brain function and human behaviour are translated into better treatments and enhanced public health. +
These guidelines were developed by the European Commission and provide guidance on how to get a proposal ready for ethics approval. When following the recommendations in the document, the research proposal will be in line with international, European Union and national laws. The guidelines pay particular attention to the following research topics.
#Human embryos & foetuses
#Human beings
#Human cells or tissues
#Personal data
#Animals
#Non-EU countries
#Environment, health & safety
#Dual use
#Exclusive focus on civil applications
#Potential misuse of research results
#Other ethics issues +
This resource, developed by the European Comission, provides guidance on ensuring research projects are ethics compliant and are considerate for research with vulnerable populations, specifically refugees, asylum seekers and migrants. +
The European Consortium for Political Research aims to advance the study of political science, international relations, and related disciplines by supporting individual researchers in developing their careers. +
An international convention that aims to protect the rights and freedom of people across Europe. In the convention, several articles protect basic human rights. Not only it protects basic rights such as the right to life, the right to a fair trial, but it also prevents harmful action by declaring the right to freedom from torture, freedom from slavery, among others. +
The European Cystic Fibrosis Society is an international community of scientific and clinical professionals committed to improving survival and quality of life for people with cystic fibrosis by promoting high quality research, education and care. +
The European Federation of Pychologists' Associations represents 38 psychologists' associations in Europe, with a total of over 300,000 members, and promotes the development, dissemination and application of psychology in all its forms, and aims to contribute to shaping a humane society, in Europe and beyond, on the basis of psychology’s expertise. +
The European Federation of Pychologists' Associations represents 38 psychologists' associations in Europe, with a total of over 300,000 members, and promotes the development, dissemination and application of psychology in all its forms, and aims to contribute to shaping a humane society, in Europe and beyond, on the basis of psychology’s expertise. +
The European Geosciences Union is dedicated to the pursuit of excellence in Earth, planetary and space science. +
The European Mathematical Society represents more than 3,000 mathematicians in Europe and promotes the development of all aspects of mathematics, in particular mathematical research, relations of mathematics to society, relations to European institutions, and mathematical education. +
European Meteorological Society (EMS) Code of Practice for communicating knowledge on climate change to the public +
The European Meteorological Society, consisting of 38 member societies and 31 associate members, aims to advance the science, profession and application of meteorology, and of sciences related to it, at the Europe-wide level, for the benefit of the whole population. +
The European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO) have compiled a range of resources to foster research integrity. These are continually updated. +
These guidelines aim to improve the peer review process by considering the diversity of research in the Social Sciences and Humanities and ways in which those disciplines are valuable to the society. +
European Network of Research Integrity Offices Recommendations for the Investigation of Research Misconduct +
The European Network of Research Integrity Offices (ENRIO) Handbook is a set of recommendations or things to consider regarding how to deal with research misconduct and how to protect those involved in the investigation based on experiences and lessons learned by member organizations within ENRIO, allowing for local or national differences in its implementation. +
The European Nuclear Society aims to promote and to contribute to the advancement of science and engineering in the field of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy by all suitable means. +
European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) Standards of Conduct +
The European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association aims to advance medical science by promoting fundamental and clinical advances in the field of nephrology, dialysis, renal transplantation, hypertension, and related subjects. +
European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research (ESOMAR) International Code on Market, Opinion and Social Research and Data Analytics +
The European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research promotes the value of market, opinion and social research and data analytics, as well as providing ethical and professional guidance on these issues. +
This short guide helps to find the Eigenfactor. It is useful for researchers, PhD students, journal editors and publishers. +
This study describes a class in research methods intended for graduate students of science and engineering. The aim was to develop and test methods that would evaluate students' progress in learning research ethics. +
Evaluating the effects that existing instruction on responsible conduct of research has on ethical decision making +
The aim of this study was to analyze what effects courses on the responsible conduct of research (RCR) have on ethical decision making. The study concluded that the existing courses on RCR can be ineffective and also detrimental, because they might lead to avoidance of ethical problems or overconfidence in solving of these problems. +
Everything We Know About Facebook's Secret Mood Manipulation Experiment. It was probably legal. But was it ethical? +
This case is about a Facebook study that manipulated users' data in order to examine emotions and their change. The study lasted for a week. Facebook claims that the use of data was in order to improve their services. The author of this case study poses the question of whether, although legal under the company's terms and conditions, such use of data is ethical. +
Bu kılavuz, araştırma doğruluğu konusunda eğitmenlerin eğitimine yönelik karma bir eğitim programını yürütmek için gerekli pratik talimatları içermektedir. +
F
This online self-assessment tool developed in the FAIRsFAIR project allows you to evaluate your knowledge about the FAIR principles and learn skills to put these principles into practice. +
This blog presents a few example cases of fraud, falsified data and other types of research misconduct identified by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). +
This workshop discusses how to deal with issues with regard to research integrity, addressing good and bad research practices. Some of the covered topics where: What is exactly research integrity? What are the risks? How to detect research misconduct? With what resources can researchers react to respond to topics related to research integrity? How should researchers act when research integrity is endangered? The planned learning outcome is to raise awareness on responsible conduct of research among PhD students and help them recognize and apply it in their research and in the research of others. +
Two graduate students co-author an article. After submission, they receive a response from a referee with critical but valid comments on one section. One of the graduate students takes the lead in the revision. The other student recognizes that in the new version, the other student has changed some data, writing to the referee that they were mistakes.
The graduate student is suspicious because there is no good explanation for the change of data. In addition, she knows the revising student is desperate to publish in a good journal before she starts her job search next year.
However there is no concrete evidence of misconduct. +
Facebook is the best human research lab ever. There’s no need to get experiment participants to sign pesky consent forms as they’ve already agreed to the site’s data use policy. A team of Facebook data scientists are constantly coming up with new ways to study human behavior through the social network. When the team releases papers about what it's learned from us, we often learn surprising things about Facebook instead -- such as the fact that it can keep track of the status updates we never actually post. +
This study explores the reasons why some clinical teachers attend centralized faculty development activities, compares their responses with those of their colleagues who do not attend these activities and suggest how faculty development programs can be more applicable to teachers' needs. +
Researchers within a multi-institutional project did not devise a contract regarding intellectual property until it was too late. +
This short article provides information about some cases of inaccurate representation of research results in the media and gives a researcher's opinion on the matter. +
A study compared two ways of nursing premature infants who require respiratory support. False results were generated by the study. This is a factual case. +
Jim Burke is preparing a presentation for Professor Rassmussen as part of his duties as research assistant. He notices that some of the data covered in the presentation might have been made up by the intervieweres. The case study asks whether he should mention it to Rassmussen and what Rassmussen should do in the situation. +
The case describes a clinical trial of an existing drug in Japan. Several universities performed the trial in collaboration with a large pharmaceutical company. The drug did not work as expected, and the researchers tried to bury the results. Eventually the case came to light, resulting in an elaborate apology from the researchers. +
An editor gives a researcher who is a friend an unfair advantage in the competitive world of publishing. +
The Federation of European Pharmacolgical Societies aims to advance research and education in pharmacology and related sciences, and to promote co-operation between national and regional pharmacological societies in Europe. +
Federation of European Toxicologists and European Societies of Toxicology (Eurotox) Code of Ethics +
The Federation of European Toxicologists and European Societies of Toxicology (Eurotox) unites more than 6,000 members from across Europe, and aims to foster the science and education of toxicology, influence regulatory and policy frameworks to promote the safety of humans, animals and the environment, and protect global health. +
In this project, the usefulness and applicability of a selection of fiction movies for RCR education were investigated.
A format for structured description of (fragments of) movies was developed and after pilot testing consensus on the format was achieved. This format was applied to 31 movies. Not all movies in our initial selection were deemed useful for RCR education; 20 movies remained in the final selection.
Legal and practical aspects of using (fragments of) movies for educational purposes and of sharing the teaching materials online (creative commons) were explored. +
This case is about fabricating results in clinical examination and misrepresenting academic credentials. +
Finnish Guidance on the Responsible Conduct of Research and Procedures for Handling Allegations of Misconduct +
In 1994, the Advisory Board formulated the first national guidelines to handle cases of alleged research misconduct. The objective of the guidelines was to recognise research misconduct and to establish common norms for handling alleged misconduct. These guidelines were revised in 1998, 2002 and updated in 2012.'"`UNIQ--ref-0000015D-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-0000015E-QINU`"' +
This document present various recommendations on the supervision of doctoral dissertations and their review process with a special emphasis on research integrity. The recommendations were prepared by the Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity and Universities Finland and presented to the universities in Finland. The document covers topics ranging from applying for doctoral students, the supervision process, issues of copyright, authorship and research data, the stages of (pre-) examination of the dissertation and the publication of the dissertation. In addition, a separate section is dedicated to the responsible conduct of research and possible violations. +
This guideline details the prerequisites for good authorship, and the different misconduct practices associated with authorship. It makes references to national and international norms of authorship. +
Finnish TJNK Guideline on Bold Communication, Responsible Influence. Science Communication Recommendations +
This document, authored by the Committee for Public Information in Finland (TJNK), is in essence a plan for communicating science to the society. It details what science communication is, why it is essential, what its goals are and the ethos behind it. +
Video on research integrity and ethics. +
This editorial provides a summary of five cases considered by the UK General Medical Council Fitness to Practise Panel. These cases are from different medical subdisciplines, such as palliative care, ophthalmology, and endocrinology. +
This guideline describes how writers can avoid plagiarism with five simple rules. +
This article provides an overview of major concepts and definitions of research ethics and integrity. Using five vignettes, the author contextualises ethical issues for the field of speech and language research. +
Five-step authorship framework to improve transparency in disclosing contributors to industry-sponsored clinical trial publications +
The article proposes Five-step Authorship Framework to create a more standardized approach when determining authorship for clinical trial publications. The aim of the presented recommendations is to facilitate more transparent authorship decisions and help readers in accessing the credibility of results. +
This case is about sharing knowledge concerning a specific group of native Americans in the Southwest of the United States. The central questions is this case are the following: "''Do the wishes of my consultants override the need of science for an ethnographic description of a little-known culture that is becoming westernized? Would it be ethical to produce a work that would appear only after all of my consultants are dead, which could be 20 or 30 years? Or does the right to privacy, which my consultants insisted on, have to be observed as long as the people maintain their independent existence?"'' +
A former graduate student at Columbia University was found by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) during its oversight review to have engaged in misconduct in research funded by National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS), National Institutes of Health (NIH).
The ORI made 21 findings of scientific misconduct based on evidence that the student had knowingly and intentionally falsified and fabricated, and, in one instance, plagiarised, data reported in three papers and their doctoral thesis. +
This is a factual case. +
The 1992 report ''Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process'' evaluates issues related to scientific responsibility and the conduct of research. It provides a valuable service in describing and analyzing a very complicated set of issues, and has served as a crucial basis for thinking about research integrity for more than two decades. +
This study assesses how policies for integrity in postgraduate research meet the needs of students as research trainees. The authors propose a framework for policy and support for postgraduate research that includes a consistent and educative approach to integrity. +
This blog post describes how a Parkinson researcher has obtained his fourth retraction due to the publication of duplicate research and failing to obtain consent from his co-authors. +
This is a guidance document to help researchers reinforce responsible research conduct in their research collaborations. +
Briefly discussing several cases of scientific misconduct. +
This is a factual case. +
The paper discusses several case studies briefly, as examples from the field of toxicology, and a few with some details. One is, the case of Ricuarte and his colleagues, who reported that Ecstasy given to primates at doses intended to replicate the doses used by people caused dopaminergic neurotoxicity, which is known to lead to Parkinson’s disease. When they tried to repeat their work they found that the original bottles had been mislabelled and that the primates had been given amphetamine. +
It discusses several case studies in the field of toxicology briefly, and a few particular extensively. One is the work of Árpád Pusztai on the toxic dietary effects of genetically modified potato on experimental rats has many interesting facets. Pusztai's conclusions on toxicity were in the public domain - via a TV interview he gave - before the results were published. This interview had widespread implications for the future of GM crops and food. A frenzied debate then occurred in the media, with scientists, politicians and single interest groups expressing their views. About a year later, when the manuscript was published, it received extensive criticism regarding its experimental design and reliability. +
This is a factual case. Three papers allegedly used fraudulent research methods as well as conclusions based on data analysed by a small private company owned by one of the co-authors. +
A leading and pioneering anaesthesiologist in Massachusetts, United States was suspected of fraud, having falsified results in at least 21 manuscripts published over 15 years. This has become one of the largest cases of fraud in US medical research history. +
The Ethics and Scientific Integrity Charter was developed by the French National Research Agency (ANR). The charter describes which ethical principles and duties researchers need to adhere to. Named principles are impartiality, integrity, probity, neutrality and independence. +
The French National Charter for Research Integrity clarifies the professional responsibilities ensuring a rigorous and trustworthy scientific approach, and will apply in the context of all national and international partnerships'"`UNIQ--ref-00000159-QINU`"'.
'"`UNIQ--references-0000015A-QINU`"' +
National research council absolves one previously sanctioned lab leader of misconduct, and holds another researcher responsible. France’s national research council has ruled that one of its plant biologists committed misconduct through manipulation and data fabrication in published figures, but it cleared another researcher whom it had heavily sanctioned in 2015.
The ruling should add some clarity and closure to the long-running saga — although the cleared researcher, Olivier Voinnet, is now raising fresh questions over how the French research agency, CNRS, handled its initial investigation. +
Scientists here are still searching their souls about two previous scandals—involving Diederik Stapel of Tilburg University in 2011 and Dirk Smeesters of Erasmus University in Rotterdam a year later. Now they have learned that a national research integrity panel has found evidence of data manipulation in the work of Jens Förster, a social psychologist at the University of Amsterdam (UvA). The university has already announced that it will request the retraction of one of Förster's articles. bThe case is drawing widespread international attention as well, in part because Förster, who's German and came to Amsterdam in 2007, enjoys a sterling reputation. "He is among the most creative and influential social psychologists of his generation," says Jeffrey Sherman of the University of California, Davis. +
In the 1990s, Denmark experienced cases of serious scientific fraud that had occurred many years ago. Some widely published cases from the United States motivated the Danish Medical Research Council to establish the Danish Committee on Scientific Dishonesty, a national committee covering the health sciences'"`UNIQ--ref-00000174-QINU`"'. This is a factual anonymized case.
'"`UNIQ--references-00000175-QINU`"' +
Funding for research comes from many sources, including from universities, industry, philantrophists and research funding organizations (RFOs). RFOs are the financiers of many research projects and provide grants to research projects, collaborations and individual researchers. The responsibility for ensuring that the funds and resources are utilized optimally without any misconduct lies with researchers, research performing organizations, ethics committees, and the funding organizations. This calls for the development of a code for appropriate utilization of funds, and to ensure academic autonomy, integrity, freedom and the rights of scholars in academic–industry relationships. +
G
With this guide, Higher Education, Funding and Research Centres (HEFRCs) wishing to implement an ETHNA System will learn how to monitor and respond to the potential societal contributions of research and innovation (R&I). You will gain insight into the benefits of responsible research and innovation (RRI) in addressing transitions related to the challenges of our time.
Based on stakeholder statements and perspectives gathered through literature reviews, surveys and deliberative workshops, you will get answers to the question of how organisations can best identify societal needs in order to address today’s most pressing demands. The guide highlights the different stakeholder viewpoints, draws on key findings from other EU-funded projects such as EURAXESS, BOHEMIA or PE2020 and consults a variety of networks such as SIS.net, ECsite, EUSEA, GenPORT, Scientix, EUCYS, RRI Tools, ENRIO, ENERI, EURAXESS.
Following the success story of “The European Charter for Researchers” and “The Code of Conduct for Recruitment”, which address the need for a consolidated and structured EU research policy, you will get inspiration and motivation to create an ETHNA System Code of Ethics and Good Practices (CEGP). +
General Code of Ethics in Scientific Research (Romanian Ministry of Education, Research and Youth) +
This Code of Conduct, developed by the Romanian Ministry of Education, Research and Youth, sets for the deontological principles and norms of behavior expected form researchers, in accordance with the national law and international research guidelines. It also describes how institutions can respond to allegations of research misconduct. This document is available in Romanian. +
This is a factual case that describes the retraction of a geology paper due to plagiarism. Although the authors described the methods that were used to obtain their data, most of the data that is presented in the paper comes from (the authors of) a previously published paper. One of the corresponding authors has commented that the researchers have performed the experiments, but the results and images of others were used for the publication. +
German Council of Science and Humanities' Recommendations for Evaluating and Controlling Research Performance +
The evaluation of research is of great importance as it could determine the allocation of funding. It is also, however, a difficult task, and various factors need to be taken into consideration. Moreover, the question of who should evaluate research has also been a point of contention. This document clarifies these issues and provides practical recommendations on the same. +
This position paper deals specially with improving the quality of the German doctorate system. It makes an assessment of the current organization of doctoral training and makes recommendations on diverse areas such as supervision of relationships, assessments and publication standards. +
This document covers recommendations on professional self-regulation in science set out by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation). The document was first published in 1997 and its most recently updated version was presented in 2019.
The white paper contains 17 recommendations for the safeguarding of good scientific practice and explains the individual recommendations extensively. In addition, the white paper considers issues and problems in the research system, covering topics such as “Competition”, “Publications”, and “Quantitative Performance Measurement”. Furthermore, the paper briefly describes experiences outside Germany and refers to other standards set on both national and international levels. +
This instructor material explores certain myths which are widespread among physicists and regard "usefulness" of teaching ethics in physics. It briefly describes possible approaches to incorporating ethics into the physics curriculum. +
This is the factual case of a professor in chemistry who allegedly stole others' work and the reluctance of his academic institution to deal appropriately with the allegations. +
Research partnerships between high-income and lower-income settings can be highly advantageous for both parties. Or they can lead to ethics dumping, the practice of exporting unethical research practices to lower-income settings. +
The blog presents the case of a retracted paper due to 'misrepresented' affiliations of the main author as well as other authorship and plagiarism issues. +
The BRIDGE guidelines for good epidemiological practice in (global health) research have been developed through a Delphi consultation study involving experts with a wide range of experience and expertise in global health and epidemiology.
The guidelines foster high-quality epidemiological studies with impact where it is needed the most: in the local communities and local research systems where the research is conducted.
[[File:Smaller bridge guidelines.jpg|thumb|3711x3711px|Figure 1. Bridge Guidelines Leaflet.]]
The guidelines bring together existing principles for research integrity and fairness in one checklist. The checklist focuses on practical implications for research and covers the six steps of study implementation: study preparation, study protocol and ethical review, data collection, data management, analysis, reporting and dissemination.'"`UNIQ--ref-00000187-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--ref-00000188-QINU`"''"`UNIQ--references-00000189-QINU`"' +
This is the 2017 annual report for the Austrian Commission for Research Integrity. In it, the commission not only provides anonymised details of the cases it had completed in 2017, but also gives an overview of the central aims and goals for its research integrity strategy.
The cases discussed relate to issues of:
*authorship, plagiarism, ghostwriting;
*citation of withdrawn publications,
*anullment of academic titles;
*ethics approvals;
*data analysis, data ownership, data protection and inaccurate presentation of data;
*right of use of visual materials;
*approval processes for doctoral theses;
*wage-dumping. +
This is the 2017 annual report for the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity ('TENK'). As well as providing anonymised details of verified violations of responsible conduct of research in five cases, and details of the ten statements the Board had issued concerning specific allegations of misconduct, the report provides an overview of the work carried out by the Board in relation to preventative action and research integrity education.
The verified cases of misconduct and questionable research practices relate to:
*Plagiarism;
*The denigration of the roles of other researchers;
*Inadequate or inappropriate referencing of earlier results;
*Self-plagiarism
The statements issued by TENK related to:
*Online posts that damaged the reputation of another researcher;
*Inadequate investigation of alleged disqualification;
*Serious accusation of negligence of ethical principles in human sciences;
*Authorship dispute;
*The investigation of alleged plagiarism in a doctoral dissertation;
*Invalidation of the responsible conduct of research process;
*Negligent reporting and storage of interview material;
*Falsification vs. A difference in scientific views. +
This is the 2017 annual report for the Swiss National Science Foundation's Commission on Scientific Integrity and Plagiarism Control Group. In it, these two bodies report on their activities.
The Plagiarism Control Group checks the research proposals submitted to the SNSF.
The Commission on Research Integrity is responsible for identifying cases of scientific misconduct in connection with applications for SNSF grants or the use thereof. If the suspected misconduct concerns the use of SNSF funding, then the Commission assists the institution where the misconduct is believed to have taken place.
In the reporting year, the Commission worked with research institutions in the investigations of three misconduct cases, two of which related to data manipulation and one related to fraud. +
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. +
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. +
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-0000019D-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. +
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. +
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 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. +
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. +
H
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. +
Embedding a comprehensive ethical dimension to organoid-based research and related technologies +
This handbook is a result of the STAR project (Support Training Activities of the data protection Reform). It aims to help trainers in delivering training on the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
<br /> +
This factual case analyses the similarities and differences in history, composition and functioning of committees on scientific dishonesty in medical research in the Nordic countries of Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and Finland. For instance, the respective committees from these countries use different definitions of scientific dishonesty. Furthermore, eight cases of potential scientific misconduct that were brought to the committees are being discussed. +
In 2014 a sexual harassment case at Yale University came to light. The case describes how a senior cardiologist made advances to a junior cardiologist. At the time, the boyfriend of the junior cardiologist worked at the same hospital, and asserts "his career stalled after [the senior cardiologist] disparaged him and froze him out professionally". '"`UNIQ--ref-000001D2-QINU`"' The case enlarged the universities' lack of response and action taken to handle harassment against women. +
In November 2014, the first author of a decade old paper in our journal and a 15-year-old paper from another journal informed us that he faked the data in two figure panels in the paper in our journal and one figure panel in the paper in the other journal. The main gist of the manipulation was loading unequal amounts or delayed loading of gel lanes.
Self-admission of data falsification is a serious charge that is difficult to disprove, and we felt a challenge to identify evidence to counter or support this type of allegation. As general guidelines, we felt there were three types of evidence that could help resolve the standoff:
(1) compelling original raw data with evidence for or against unequal or delayed gel loading;
(2) verified replication already existing within the published literature; and
(3) as a last resort, a replication study performed by a wholly independent laboratory. +
This is a case study about conducting research in traditional cultural settings. Implementing international research ethics in the complex realities of local contexts can be challenging. The representation of reseacrhers as guests and the cultural value of hospitality in Pakistan creates nuanced dilemmas. How to do field reseach without deepening local poverty, but respesting cultural values? +
This is a case study about conducting research in traditional cultural settings. Implementing international research ethics in the complex realities of local contexts can be challenging. The representation of reseacrhers as guests and the cultural value of hospitality in Pakistan creates nuanced dilemmas. How to do field reseach without deepening local poverty, but respesting cultural values? +
This is a factual case about three child psychiatrists who failed to disclose consultancy fees that they received from pharmaceutical companies. Between 2000 and 2007, the three researchers received a combined total of $4.2 million from different companies. The three scientists claim that this was an honest mistake, and consequently were "banned from participating in 'industry-sponsored outside activities' for one year, to be followed by a two-year period of close monitoring and a delay in consideration for promotion.'"`UNIQ--ref-000002C8-QINU`"'
'"`UNIQ--references-000002C9-QINU`"' +
A PI and her students are performing a promising experiment but they experience some difficulties with the material they use. They discover that their experiment could be improved by exchanging one of their materials for another, toxic material. Should they change the material? What are the responsibilities of the PI towards her students? Do the students have any role in the decision? +
This case describes how a high profile Chinese scientist, who at one point was the head of the research integrity initiative in China, become involved in a research scandal of his own work. Image manipulation expert, Elizabeth Bik, uncovered in 2013 that over 40 papers co-authored by the scientist appeared to be falsified. In several of his papers images appeared to be falsified.'"`UNIQ--ref-000001CC-QINU`"' An overview of the papers of the scientist, of which several are now retracted, can be found on PubPeer. '"`UNIQ--ref-000001CD-QINU`"' +
This study identifies timeliness as one of the most important aims of health care. It is recognized as a fundamental factor in quality of care, measuring of wait times and the amount of times it takes for a patient to have access to an appointment and see a clinician. The authors conclude that timeliness emerged as a crucial indicator of overall system performance. +
This fictional and educational case describes the use and impact of herbicide resistant rice, a type of rice genetically modified to resist weeds. +
This short text gives an example of a successful replication of a Van Gogh's work of art “Sunset at Montmajour”. The painting was stored in an attic for a century because it was believed to be a fake. However, a new research, including analysis of the pigments in the paint and their discoloration (and also letters from Van Gogh), the Van Gogh Museum has changed its view. +
An anthropologist on a Native American reservation has been told that a person committed a serious crime. He denies meeting this person when questioned by the tribal police. +
An anthropologist on a Native American reservation has been told that a person committed a serious crime. He meets the suspect but denies having seen them when questioned by the tribal police. +
History Educators in the Western Balkans Participate in New Training with “Once Upon a Time…We Lived Together. 1900-1945” +
This multilingual teaching tool is the main outcome of the History that Conects project "How to teach Sensitive and Controversial History in the countries of former Yugoslavia?" (2011-2014). It contains 23 workshops focusing on some of the most sensitive and controversial issues in the region between 1900-1945. Educators from all seven project countries - Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo, Montenegro, Republic of North Macedonia, Serbia and Slovenia - contributed to this publication. +
This is a factual case about a medical study that took place in a Guatemalan prison. In this study, experiments into syphilis infection were performed on military personnel, prisoners, asylum inmates, and orphans, without their consent. Rather than giving a detailed description of events, like other reports on this subject have already done, the article reconstructs the research environment that allowed this unethical study to take place. +
An author sends his manuscript to be submitted for review. The referee, who gives a positive review, claims he was coincidentally working on the same problem, and weeks later submits his own paper on the subject. The author complains about this to the editor, who calls the referee. The referee is vague and capricious in his answers. +
The case focuses on the complicated story of a genetic research on sexual orientation. +
This a real case about an orthopaedic expert (Prof. Aspenberg) who was invited to join a workgroup in a luxury hotel in Switzerland, so that he would advocate for a new commercial method of bone enhancement called prophylactic surgery. He was also asked to become a co-author of a paper that promotes this method and an associated product. He realises that this is set up by a commercial company and that both the working group and the follow-up paper are aimed at promoting the company's product, and he declines the request to advocate for the method, or become a co-author. +
How can we provide effective training for research ethics committee members? A European assessment +
This article examines a workshop which dealt with issue of training for members of research ethics committees (RECs) throughout Europe. It summarizes the discussion and provides solutions to develop REC training. +
This video addresses disclosure of financial and nonfinancial relationships and activities. It contains relevant guidance on how to handle them. +
How to coexist in the laboratory without committing a homicide/suicide? A few of the most typical laboratory difficulties that need to be handled are organization and staff issues. '"`UNIQ--ref-00000945-QINU`"'
Because of that, it is important to nourish the virtues of collaborative spirit, patience, and humility at the workplace.
'"`UNIQ--references-00000946-QINU`"' +
How to make the digital scholarly monograph fit for Open Access by applying smart services and tools +
This infographic presents and describes smart services and tools for open access scholarly monographs publishing. These are identification service, annotation service, peer-review certification system, metrics service and name entity recognition. +
This visual art aims to increase awareness on research integrity and serves as a learning tool. It consists of four parts. First part focuses on image manipulation and falsification. Second part deals with research data which includes human errors, poor choices and complete fabrication. Third part, that copes with text-based information, addresses plagiarism, fake journals and censorship. Fourth part concerns detection of grey zones between minor problems and negligence. +
This case study presents a number of research ethics violations by a distinguished eye doctor who has helped in developing break-through medical treatments. +
The Human Rights Education for Legal Professionals (HELP) Online Training provides those in the legal and health field with the necessary information to understand the key human rights principles in the biomedical field. The course covers legal instruments, including the [[Resource:5d5f90dc-227a-4637-8aa0-2157dcdf17df|Oviedo convention]], European Court of Law and non-binding instruments adopted by the Council of Europe Committee on Bioethics. +
<div>This framework was completed and submitted to the Council of Europe in September 2021. It presents an end-to-end approach to the assurance of AI project lifecycles that integrates context-based risk analysis and appropriate stakeholder engagement with comprehensive impact assessment, and transparent risk management, impact mitigation, and innovation assurance practices. Taken together, these interlocking processes constitute a Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law Assurance Framework (HUDERAF). The HUDERAF combines the procedural requirements for principles-based human rights due diligence with the governance mechanisms needed to set up technical and socio-technical guardrails for responsible and trustworthy AI innovation practices. Its purpose is to provide an accessible and user-friendly set of mechanisms for facilitating compliance with a binding legal framework on artificial intelligence, based on the Council of Europe's standards on human rights, democracy, and the rule of law, and to ensure that AI innovation projects are carried out with appropriate levels of public accountability, transparency, and democratic governance.</div><div></div> +
This online training consists of various materials regarding human subject research. It includes website intended for people who do research work in communities, book on ethical questions involving research with humans, multimedia mini tutorials, videos and webinars. It also provides resources for the public on participating in research. +
HERA is a network that includes 26 national funding agencies with aim of leading and developing funding opportunities for humanities researchers in Europe. Together with the European Commission, HERA has funded 55 transnational humanities-focused projects. +
This set of guidelines from the Hungarian Academy of Sciences includes fundamental moral and ethical principles of scientific research, as well as more concrete and applied guidance on day-to-day matters of research like avoiding falsification, fabrication, plagiarism; fair authorship procedures; and reporting violations of ethical research practices.
What sets this document apart from others is its extensive guidance for the nation's Science Ethics Committee that adjudicates and oversees investigations of ethics violations. Committee members are directed to issue consequence proportional to the "seriousness" of the act; to base their investigation on the principles of objectivity, completeness, and "exact exploration;" to maintain confidentiality; and to presume innocence. +
Hungarian Decree on the system of integrity management at public administration bodies and the procedural rules of receiving lobbyists +
Although not aimed at research integrity, this decree targets all public institutions (with the exception of the law enforcement and military agencies). It aims to ensure integrity, or the adherence to regulations and standards, within organizations, and prevent corruption or undue influence through external factors. +
I
The International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) is unique in bringing together the regulatory authorities and pharmaceutical industry to discuss scientific and technical aspects of pharmaceuticals and develop ICH guidelines. ICH's mission is to achieve greater harmonisation worldwide to ensure that safe, effective and high quality medicines are developed, and registered and maintained in the most resource efficient manner whilst meeting high standards. +
This initiative aims collect, classify and share initiatives to foster research integrity and to inspire others to implement such initiatives. It emphasizes that exchange and mutual learning between stakeholders in research would help them strengthen their initiatives. +
Part of the INSPIRE project was to develop a checklist to assess and classify initiatives that foster responsible research practices. Following a Delphi method including two online surveys and a workshop, a checklist was drafted, piloted and revised until consensus among the INSPIRE team was achieved. The result is an extensive yet practical checklist that can be used by many stakeholders and for multiple purposes. +
INTEGRITY: Empowering students for Responsible Research Conduct (RCR) through evidence-based, scaffolded learning. +
This course on Research Integrity for High school students consists of 9 modules, each of which has been designed to address the main research integrity issues of most relevance to secondary school students. Empowerment of the student for responsible research conduct is at the core of the INTEGRITY course and each of the modules.
The different modules present concrete situations representing different integrity challenges that touch different core integrity issues such as relialability, honesty, respect and accountability.
Although it is recommended to follow the order of the modules and module timelines, the teacher has a high degree of flexibility with this. This flexibility will allow the teacher to adopt alternative pedagogical approaches and alternative module timelines which are more appropriate to the particular circumstances of the student cohort, class timetable, and any other school requirements.
[[File:High school course logo.png|center|frame]]
This course was developed in the [https://community.embassy.science/c/integrity/26 H2020 INTEGRITY project] by Mariëtte van den Hoven, Miriam van Loon, Hesther van Gulick and Eline Borsboom, and funded by EU H2020.
<br /> +
<span lang="EN-GB">Image alteration with the intent of distorting scientific experiment results is considered a serious research misconduct (Parrish et Noonan, 2009). These manipulations encompass various techniques, such as cropping, colour adjustment, selective enhancement, and duplication, among other techniques (Rossner et Yamada, 2004).</span>
'''References'''
*<span lang="EN-GB">Parrish D, Noonan B. Image manipulation as research misconduct. Sci Eng Ethics. 2009 Jun;15(2):161-7. doi: 10.1007/s11948-008-9108-z. Epub 2009 Jan 6. PMID: 19125357.</span>
*<span lang="EN-GB">Rossner M, Yamada KM. What's in a picture? The temptation of image manipulation. J Cell Biol. 2004 Jul 5;166(1):11-5. doi: 10.1083/jcb.200406019. PMID: 15240566; PMCID: PMC2172141.</span> +
The case describes how an image manipulation scandal evolved in Italy. Enrico Bucci's company was offering publication of meta-analysis services. Bucci had detected the images of gel-electrophoresis analysis contained anomalies while conducting a global search to exclude contaminated literature from his database. A list of such papers were authored by Alfredo Fusco. Out of around 300 papers on which Fusco was first or last author, the team found 53 containing gels with potential irregularities, including one from as far back as 1985. After discovering that there was no academic organization in Italy that dealt with such findings, in February 2012 Bucci contacted the Milan police. +
As managing editor, I view all manuscripts before they are assigned to an editor. Within a 4 week period, I have detected five manuscripts where photographs of either gels or plant materials were used twice or three times in the same manuscript. These manuscripts were immediately rejected.
However, we are not convinced that these are cases of deliberate misleading of the scientific community. It rather seems to us that many laboratories consider photographs as illustrations that can be manipulated, and not as original data. Thus gels are often cleaned of impurities, bands are cut out and photographs of plant material only serve to show what the authors want to demonstrate, and the material does not necessarily originate from the experiment in question.
When the editor-in-chief rejected such a manuscript, a typical response was: “I am surprised by the question and problem you pointed out in our manuscript. I checked the pictures you mentioned and I agree that they are really identical. But please be reminded that the purpose of these gel pictures was only to show the different types of banding pattern, and the gels of a few specific types were not very clear, so my PhD student repeatedly used the clearer ones. This misleading usage does not have an influence on data statistics or the final conclusion”. +
The video provides a brief introduction about problematics related to image manipulation. This video explains the research on image manipulation in the Humboldt-Elsevier Advanced Data and Text Center in Berlin. +
This article addresses challenges in implementing RRI in research practice. With this aim, authors of the article developed a card-based method - IMAGINE RRI, which should encourage researchers to adopt RRI in their research practice. Also, researchers should reflect on how their institutional framework encourages or discourages RRI practices. +
Conducting participatory fieldwork with children can result in a researcher becoming involved in their lives more broadly, blurring the lines around the researcher role. This may be particularly the case when working with children in precarious situations, such as AIDS-affected children, parentless children, child beggars, child laborers, and street children. As educated, relatively wealthy, interested and supportive adults, researchers appear to hold considerable power and children may see this as a potential benefit or asset that could help to improve their situation. Researchers who undertake research with children in these sorts of contexts are generally motived by social justice and seek through their work to help improve the conditions of these children’s lives and others like them. These underlying motivations – a desire to be helped and a desire to help – can create added ethical complexity to participatory research relationships, particularly in relation to expectations, safety and capacity. In this case study, which is somewhat connected to my case study in the Payment and Compensation section on reciprocity in participatory research with children, I draw on an example of an incident involving the police and street children that occurred when I was undertaking participatory research in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. +
This article presents two factual cases of a substantial and very steep improvement in two journals’ impact factor (JIF): Case A demonstrates how the journal FOLIA PHONIATR LOGO, in an attempt to improve its JIF, published an editorial which cited a large number of its own previously published articles; as a result, the journal was revoked in the following year by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). In case B, the journal ACTA CRYSTALLOGR improved its overall impact factor by an astonishing 2,334% following the publication of a single very highly cited article. Because of the way that JIF is calculated, the journal’s high factor was retained for two years. However, in contrast to case A above, the journal in case B was not revoked. +
Improving epistemological beliefs and moral judgment through an STS-based science ethics education program +
This study develops a Science–Technology–Society (STS)-based science ethics education program for high school students planning to major in science and engineering. The program includes the fields of philosophy, history, sociology and ethics of science and technology and other STS-related theories and aims to help solve moral and social dilemmas in science and engineering. The authors conclude that there was significant development in students' epistemological beliefs and moral judgment. +
This article describes developing of a booklet that informs participants of their rights in clinical studies. The aim is to improve informed consent. +
This is a factual case of misconduct by physics researcher Hendrik Schön. +
A graduate student felt that discrepancies between her and her mentor’s findings were due to inadequate testing on the mentor’s part; the mentor contends that the student’s inexperience is the issue. +
The aim of this study was to align research ethics education programs with the demands of practice. Research participants were senior researchers who suggest that the development of researchers' decision making should be included into ethics education programs, along with the existing formal rules for research. +
This case is about scientific fraud in research concerning psychopharmacology. Specifically, it is about the use of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) group of antidepressants that has the potential to trigger suicidality in a subgroup of patients. This is a factual case, linked to companies' abilties to keep clinical trial data out of the public domain. +
This blog post is about two research subjects who received 100 times more caffeine than they were supposed to and were consequently hospitalised. +
Competent supervision and mentoring must be offered to researchers at all stages of their career development. The RIPP must specify procedures and criteria for qualifying as a supervisor or mentor and must include guidelines for supervision and mentoring of researchers at different career stages, with due attention to responsible conduct of research, research integrity and academic leadership should be valued. +
This infographic provides a quick overview of the four guidelines on RI education developed within the SOPs4RI project, focusing on the RI education of 1) bachelor, master and PhD students, 2) post-doctorate and senior researchers, 3) other research integrity stakeholders, as well as 4) continuous research integrity education. +
This resource gives a comprehensive overview of RI-related guidelines useful for research funding organization during the entire funding process. +
These infographics developed by the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) provide information on RCR and advises how to handle research misconduct. It is aimed at RCR instructors and and Research Integrity Officers (RIOs) to help them educate their colleagues and students on issues of RI. +
A professor serving at an administrative committee at the university reviews surveys sent to students, faculty and staff regarding issues relevant to the university. The surveys are meant to inform the administration about the opinions of key stakeholders. However, the professor observes that some of the results could be used for a paper about the crisis of the higher education which he proceeds to write. The case study asks whether the surveys should be reviewed by an ethics committee and whether the professor's approach protects human subjects. +
A research team preparing a study of urban poverty decides to hold a pre-test during a conference related to a devoted subject. After the organizers agree, they distribute surveys among the conference participants who may fill them if they want. The case study asks whether the researchers obtained sufficient consent. +
This article presents two cases regarding digital surveillance technologies implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic and describes the privacy implications. The authors conclude that there is a need for privacy considerations in the design of digital solutions and also privacy reflections risk exposing the health of citizens and wasting public resources. +
This project intended to develop models for integrating responsible conduct of research (CRC) into graduate programs. The aim was to help students develop ethical reasoning skills. +
In 2014 we, at COPE received a communication from the Research Integrity Officer of an academic institution informing us that a paper, published in our journal in 2013, included falsified or fabricated data. We were informed that, following an investigation, they had determined that scientific misconduct had occurred.
Within a few days we received a communication from one of the authors of the paper (who is no longer at the institution) reiterating this assertion and providing some further explanation; that a former student had fabricated data and that it affected the paper (but providing no specifics). +
A case about a mentally ill young man who stabbed himself to death in an industry-sponsored drug study. This is a factual case. +
This is a factual case. +
This study explored whether journals require institutional review board (IRB) approval for manuscripts containing research with humans . The study showed that about half of biomedical research journals in English included in the 1995 Abridged Index Medicus list do not require IRB approval. +
This instructor manual is intended to provide motivation and content for a workshop under title: "Mentoring for Responsible Research." The aim is to empower research faculty to discuss about the RCR and to implement strategies for research ethics mentoring. +
This article describes a Research Experience for Undergraduates (REU) as an opportunity for undergraduate students to participate in the real research. It provides information on how to integrate ethics into undergraduate education sucessfully on the example of students of engineering. +
Integrating a peer-taught module on practical research ethics into the graduate student orientation curriculum +
This study describes an ethics training for new chemistry graduate students. The authors used real cases and experiences of senior graduate students for discussion of moral issues. +
Glossary on research integrity terms. +
Integrity Games - a research based learning platform on academic integrity aimed at undergraduate university students +
Integrity Games is a research based teaching tool on academic integrity aimed at university undergraduate students from all disciplines.
'''<u>How to use the tool in teaching</u>'''
Integrity Games is a '''research based learning platform on academic integrity aimed at undergraduate university students''' across all faculties. It is designed to spark interest, reflection and learning through '''four gamified cases''' and a library of central concepts.
Integrity Games is built on the idea that academic integrity is more than avoidance of clear-cut cheating. It also involves knowledge of the basic requirements for academic integrity, and competence in navigating the many grey zones between outright cheating and good practice.
Many of the academic integrity issues students face – such as freeriding in group work or handling deviating data - are not covered by the local disciplinary rules, and even if they are, the interpretation of the rules may be context dependent.
Navigating grey zones therefore requires attention to context and reflection on the broader aims of higher education.
Integrity Games encourages this through engaging and realistic cases drawn from a major study on the integrity issues commonly faced by undergraduate students in Europe.
The tool in designed to be flexible and it is available in different languages. To get an overview, watch a video at the Integrity Games [https://integgame.eu/forteachers page.]
Suggestions and information on how to use the games in teaching:
* [https://integgame.eu/1145 Intended learning outcomes and target groups]
* [https://integgame.eu/1149 Getting started: Using Integrity Games in teaching]
* [https://integgame.eu/1146 Structure of the cases] +
Integrity Games is built on the idea that academic integrity is more than avoidance of clear-cut cheating. It also involves knowledge of the basic requirements for academic integrity, and competence in navigating the many grey zones between outright cheating and good practice. Integrity Games offer undergraduate students the possibility to reflect on multiple dilemmas and cases. Students and their teachers can start playing Integrity Games by taking a quiz that will personalize their information. Once they have done the quiz, all the cases and dilemmas will be available.[[File:Integrity games.png|center|frame]]
The first version of Integrity Games was developed in 2021 as part of the research project [https://h2020integrity.eu/ INTEGRITY] funded by the EU through Horizon 2020. The site will be continually expanded with new cases and translations. +
This video series aims to help researchers, post docs, students, administrators and technicians to develop informed responses to ethical issues in research. The aim is to provoke discussion on ethical issues confronting different participants in research. +
This video series will introduce key topics and ethical dilemmas in the responsible conduct of research. These videos are about research integrity-related issues amongst the most common within the research environment at all career level. +
A graduate student obtains the same findings as his mentor’s collaborators who work at other universities. The graduate student’s mentor and mentor’s collaborator have both signed a Material Transfer Agreement. +
A PhD graduate developed a new disk drive technology during his PhD. His inventions are patentable, and he and his university started the patent process. The graduate has just started his job at a new employer, a technology firm. In his first weeks, he discovers could solve an important bottleneck for his new employer. If he would reveal what he knows, he would be highly appreciated by his new employer, yet jeopardize the patent process of his old institution. There are large financial interests at stake. +
A graduate student makes a significant scientific discovery. When he shares it with his advisor, the advisor tells him the discovery is relatively minor. A few weeks later, the student finds out his advisor has published his discovery. The publication acknowledges the discussion with the student, but does not include him as an author. When the student confronts his advisor, she responds that "this is how the world works" and that he should be faster to publish his findings next time
The student makes a complaint to the department chair, who asks if he has proof. The student did not takes detailed notes and fears he cannot prove the matter. He feels stupid, and doubts if he should just accept what happened. +
Doing Global Science: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in the Global Research Enterprise can instruct researchers how to responsibly conduct research in the current global setting.The guide highlights international research settings, including how globalization effects science, interdisciplinary projects, science in teams and how information technologies play a role. The guide can be instructive for any researcher working in an international environment and:
<br />
*Provides practical guidance and instructions for doing scientific research in today’s global setting
*Covers everything from responsible conduct to communication with the public
*Features numerous real-world scenarios drawn from an array of disciplines and national contexts
*Focuses on issues commonly encountered in international collaborations
*Is written by a panel of leading experts from around the world
*Is an essential guide for practicing scientists and anyone concerned about fostering research integrity
<br /> +
This training aims to promote a better understanding of basic research concepts and it's intended for researchers with little or no formal training in this area. The training program consists of five modules: Introduction, What is Research?; Research Design; Elements of Research; Methods of Information Collection; Handling Information. +
This book contains some cases of unsuccessful interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary projects. It offers failure scenarios for:
- projects that did not get off the ground
- projects that did not have the correct personnel for some objectives
- projects that did not reach their original objectives but met other objectives
- projects that failed to anticipate important differences among collaborators. +
To acquire the skills needed to ‘pass the expertise’ and train others, and to understand the aim, content and didactics of each exercises, trainees need to practice them. Therefore, between the first and the second face-to-face session trainees need to facilitate the 5 exercises that they have learned about and experienced during the first part of the face-to-face program ([https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:64cb2917-6ee4-44ca-ad3b-b998bc6786ea Self-Declaration Approach]; [https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:Ac206152-effd-475b-b8cd-7e5861cb65aa Debate and Dialogue]; [https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:747f4d61-3c97-4c4b-acd9-4d69c95f134b Virtues and Norms]; [https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:522ba3d0-9f26-41d5-9ecf-b4c88214887c The middle position]; and [https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c Dilemma game]). +
Between the first and the second face-to-face group sessions trainees facilitate the 5 exercises experienced during the first part of the face-to-face sessions ([https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:64cb2917-6ee4-44ca-ad3b-b998bc6786ea Self-Declaration Approach]; [https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:Ac206152-effd-475b-b8cd-7e5861cb65aa Debate and Dialogue]; [https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:747f4d61-3c97-4c4b-acd9-4d69c95f134b Virtues and Norms]; [https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:522ba3d0-9f26-41d5-9ecf-b4c88214887c The middle position]; and [https://embassy.science/wiki/Instruction:A0dd2e82-52e7-4030-a396-54525630e75c Dilemma game]). In order to learn about their experience and prepare for the last face to face group session trainers need to collect and analyse the '''[https://www.dropbox.com/s/1fmppqv189jxlqj/Self%20reflection%20form.pdf?dl=0 self reflection forms]'''. This will support trainers in understanding which issues should be addressed and which exercises need more practice during the last session of the training. +
This form allows authors of a manuscript to share information with readers about the interests of the authors, and about anything that could influence how the manuscript is read. +
