Difference between revisions of "4.2.3 Responsible conduct of research"
(→C. Resources) |
(→C. Resources) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
Training and learning resources: | Training and learning resources: | ||
| − | * [https://www.eur.nl/en/about-eur/policy-and-regulations/integrity/research-integrity/dilemma-game | + | * [https://www.earma.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/EARMA-ERION-Training-Report-2020_v20.10.pdf EARMA Guidance for implementation of ethics and integrity training] |
| + | * [https://www.eur.nl/en/about-eur/policy-and-regulations/integrity/research-integrity/dilemma-game Erasmus University dilemma game] | ||
| + | * [https://ukrio.org/publications/case-study-packs/ UKRIO case studies] | ||
| + | * [https://ori.hhs.gov/research-clinic US ORI The research clinic] | ||
| + | |||
| + | Examples and guidance on building institutional policies: | ||
| + | * [https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/415175/bis-15-200-whistleblowing-guidance-for-employers-and-code-of-practice.pdf Whistleblowing: Guidance for employers and code of practice] | ||
---------------- | ---------------- | ||
Latest revision as of 15:36, 3 November 2020
A. Background & Definitions
This item refers to one of the Core Requirements (Core Requirement 5 - "The research unit must have a procedure to act upon concerns of potential misconduct") and is, therefore, considered as essential.
Please see Toolbox item 1.4.1.1 Research integrity for background and definitions.
B. Guidance & Expectations
The research unit (or the research organization to which the research unit belongs to) must have a uniform and robust procedure in place to deal with potential research misconduct:
- A central and known to all researchers "speak up" mechanism for research misconduct concerns must be in place.
- This could be an ombudsperson or research integrity officer or an anonymous mailbox or a confidential electronic "hotline" from where concerns are triaged to a dedicated person.
- This could be a person of trust identified in the neighboring research unit or organization and who would be in a position to deal with violations and allegations of misconduct in agreement with the national or institutional guidelines. Please see also the FAQ section.
- In general, allegations of misconduct are handled by a standing or ad hoc investigation committee taking into account the required expertise and potential conflict of interest.
- The ENRIO handbook on Recommentations for the Investigation of Research Misconduct is a good resource for practical recommendations.
It is advised that the procedure, including the speak-up (anonymous reporting, whistleblower policy) and the investigation mechanism, is described and documented in a single file in the Dossier and the research unit informed about it via Email or in group meetings.
PLEASE DO NOT FORGET
- Research misconduct is a sensitive topic and has to be handled with maximal care, fairness, and integrity
- To provide training on research integrity and document it
- To make sure that every member of the research unit knows how to report potential misconduct
C. Resources
Essential reading:
- The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ALLEA)
- WHO Code of Conduct for responsible researh
- ENERI Research Integrity & Research Ethics Manual
- ENRIO Handbook on Recommendations for the Investigation of Research Misconduct
- German Research Foundation
Training and learning resources:
- EARMA Guidance for implementation of ethics and integrity training
- Erasmus University dilemma game
- UKRIO case studies
- US ORI The research clinic
Examples and guidance on building institutional policies:
back to Toolbox
Next item: 4.2.4 Key performance indicators
