- Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2018)
- Survey “Research integrity in Norway” (2018)
- UK Report “Research Integrity” (2018)
- The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2017)
- Report “Fostering Integrity in Research” (2017)
- The Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2017)
- Authorship in scientific publications – Recommendations of the Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences (2013)
- Investigating Research Misconduct Allegations in International Collaborative Research Projects (OECD, 2009)
- Procedure for the Investigation of Misconduct in Research (UKRIO, 2008)
- Best Practices for Ensuring Scientific Integrity and Preventing Misconduct (OECD, 2007)
- Collection of international RI-literature by the European Network of Research Integrity Offices (ENRIO)
Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2018)
In October 2018, the Netherlands CoC for Research Integrity was published. The Code is addressed to both institutions responsible for the investigation of research misconduct and researchers, especially researchers in early career stages. The Code of Conduct informs about standards of good scientific practice and presents Standard Operating Procedures in cases of suspected misconduct.
Survey “Research integrity in Norway” (2018)
In 2018, a survey on research integrity was conducted among researchers and scientists in Norway. Over 7300 questionnaires were evaluated. You can find a summary of the main findings as well as the complete report “Research integrity in Norway – results from a nationwide survey on research ethics” here.
UK Report “Research Integrity” (2018)
Since the Concordat to Support Research Integrity of 2012, universities in the UK are called upon to publish an annual report on research integrity and scientific misconduct. The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee has now published a report “Research integrity” (2018) in which it analyzes the extent to which universities in the UK comply with the concordat. One of the key conclusions of the report is that it is unlikely that the announcement that there have not been any cases of scientific misconduct holds true. The report also contains a list of those universities in the UK that have already published their annual reports.
Particularly worthwhile mentioning is the comprehensive report of the University of Cambridge, which comprises anonymous accounts on the investigations of scientific misconduct that have been undertaken at the university. Further information and literature on the topic of research integrity in the UK can be found on the website of the UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO).
The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2017)
In 2017, ALLEA (ALL European Academies) published the revised edition of the European Code of Conduct. As a member of ENRIO, the German Research Ombudsman (Ombudsman für die Wissenschaft) has played an active part in the revision of the first edition of the Code of Conduct.
Report “Fostering Integrity in Research” (2017)
In 2017, the National Academies on Sciences, Engineering and Medicine published the report “Fostering Integrity in Research” documenting the developments in the field of research integrity in the US. The report starts with 11 recommendations aiming at preserving and advancing integrity in science and research. It continues with current cases of scientific misconduct in the US, definitions of misconduct and questionable research practices, and a discussion of how to prevent and how to handle instances of scientific misconduct. The report is based on the 1992 report “Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process”. One of the new elements of the 2017 report is the demand to implement an Advisory Board on Research Integrity.
The Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2017)
In Denmark, all cases of alleged scientific misconduct are, by law, handled by the Danish Committee on Research Misconduct, which is affiliated with the Ministry of Higher Education and Science. Therefore, the Danish system for investigating scientific misconduct differs fundamentally from the German system which is based on self-regulation. It is not possible to hand in an anonymous enquiry to the Danish Committee as all accused person by law have the right to know the name of the whistleblower.
Authorship in scientific publications – Recommendations of the Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences (2013)
The Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences published a guideline on “Authorship in scientific publications – Analysis and recommendations” in 2013. The guideline sheds light on various aspects of authorship, including requirements for authorship, procedures for determining authorship and author’s responsibility. It focuses also on the relationship between authorship guidelines and the principles of scientific integrity.
Investigating Research Misconduct Allegations in International Collaborative Research Projects (OECD, 2009)
The OECD Global Science Forum published a guide on how to handle alleged scientific misconduct in international collaborative research projects in 2009. Please find the guide here.
Procedure for the Investigation of Misconduct in Research (UKRIO, 2008)
In 2008, the UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO) published a guideline on the procedure for the investigation of misconduct in research. On the UKRIO website, you can also find a variety of additional resources on questions of research integrity.
Best Practices for Ensuring Scientific Integrity and Preventing Misconduct (OECD, 2007)
In their 2007 report on Best Practices, the OECD Global Science Forum presents recommendations on how to handle scientific misconduct in international contexts, with an emphasis on the question of how misconduct can be prevented. Please find the report here.
Collection of international RI-literature by the European Network of Research Integrity Offices (ENRIO)
ENRIO provides an extensive collection of international guidelines and reports on research integrity, best practices, case studies and teaching tools. You can find the collection on the ENRIO website under “resources”.
Photoby Heidi Sandstrom via Unsplash.