finnish advisory board on research integrity (tenk)

Tutkimuseettinen neuvottelukunta | Forskningsetiska delegationen | Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity

FINNISH ADVISORY BOARD ON RESEARCH INTEGRITY (TENK)

Responsible conduct of research and procedures for handling allegations of

misconduct in Finland


FINNISH ADVISORY BOARD ON RESEARCH INTEGRITY (TENK)

• Founded 1991 • Appointed by the Ministry of Education and

Culture in Finland for three year terms• Current term 1.2.2013 - 31.1.2016• Office situated independently at the

Federation of the Finnish Learned Societies, Helsinki


FUNCTIONS (Decree 1347/1991)

1. makes proposals and issues statements to governmental authorities on legislative and other matters concerning research ethics

2. acts as an expert body working towards the resolution of ethical issues relating to research

3. takes initiative in advancing research ethics and promotes discussion concerning research ethics

4. monitors international developments in the field and takes actively part in international cooperation

5. informs the public about research ethics


FINNISH GUIDELINES

• First national guidelines of Finland for the prevention, handling and investigation of misconduct and fraud in scientific research were published in 1994

• “Good scientific practice and procedures for handling misconduct and fraud in science” (2002)

• ”A template for a researcher´s curriculum vitae” (2012)

• ”Responsible conduct of research and procedures for handling allegations of misconduct in Finland” (2012)


VOLUNTARY COMMITMENT

- Finnish guidelines provide researchers with a model for the responsible conduct of research.

- The effectiveness of these guidelines is based on a voluntary commitment by the research community to adhere to them, and to increase awareness of the principles of research integrity.

- These guidelines apply to all academic disciplines in Finland, and a list of the organisations committed to these guidelines can be found on the TENK´s website.


THE RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT OF RESEARCH 1

1. The research follows the principles that are endorsed by the research community, that is, integrity, meticulousness, and accuracy in conducting research, and in recording, presenting, and evaluating the research results.

2. The methods applied for data acquisition as well as for research and evaluation, conform to scientific criteria and are ethically sustainable. When publishing the research results, the results are communicated in an open and responsible fashion that is intrinsic to the dissemination of scientific knowledge.



3. The researcher takes due account of the work and achievements of other researchers by respecting their work, citing their publications appropriately, and by giving their achievements the credit and weight they deserve in carrying out the researcher’s own research and publishing its results.

4. The researcher complies with the standards set for scientific knowledge in planning and conducting the research, in reporting the research results and in recording the data obtained during the research.



5. The necessary research permits have been acquired and the preliminary ethical review that is required for certain fields of research has been conducted.

6. Before beginning the research or recruiting the researchers, all parties within the research project or team (the employer, the principal investigator, and the team members) agree on the researchers’ rights, responsibilities, and obligations, principles concerning authorship, and questions concerning archiving and accessing the data.

These agreements may be further specified during the course of the research.



7. Sources of financing, conflicts of interest or other commitments relevant to the conduct of research are announced to all members of the research project and reported when publishing the research results.

8. Researchers refrain from all research-related evaluation and decision-making situations, when there is reason to suspect a conflict of interest.

9. The research organisation adheres to good personnel and financial administration practices and takes into account the data protection legislation.


VIOLATIONS OF THE RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT OF RESEARCH

1. Research misconduct2. Disregard for the responsible conduct of

research


RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

• Fabrication• Falsification (misrepresentation)• Plagiarism• Misappropriation


FABRICATION

Fabrication refers to reporting invented observations to the research community. In other words, the fabricated observations have not been made by using the methods as claimed in the research report. Fabrication also means presenting invented results in a research report.


FALSIFICATION (MISREPRESENTATION )

Falsification (misrepresentation) refers to modifying and presenting original observations deliberately so that the results based on those observations are distorted. The falsification of results refers to the unfounded modification or selection of research results. Falsification also refers to the omission of results or information that are essential for the conclusions.


PLAGIARISM

Plagiarism, or unacknowledged borrowing, refers to representing another person’s material as one’s own without appropriate references. This includes research plans, manuscripts, articles, other texts or parts of them, visual materials, or translations. Plagiarism includes direct copying as well as adapted copying.


MISAPPROPRIATION

Misappropriation refers to the unlawful presentation of another person’s result, idea, plan, observation or data as one’s own research.


DISREGARD FOR THE RESPONSIBLE CONDUCT OF RESEARCH

• denigrating the role of other researchers in publications, such as neglecting to mention them

• reporting research results and methods in a careless manner

• inadequate record-keeping and storage of results and research data

• Self-plagiarism (publishing the same research results multiple times ostensibly as new and novel results)

• misleading the research community in other ways


OTHER IRRESPONSIBLE PRACTISES 1

• manipulating authorship, for example, by including in the list of authors persons who have not participated in the research, or by taking credit for work produced by what is referred to as ghost authors

• exaggerating one’s own scientific and scholarly achievements, for example, in a CV or its translation, in a list of publications, or on one’s homepage

• expanding the bibliography of a study to artificially increase the number of citations


OTHER IRRESPONSIBLE PRACTISES 2

• delaying the work of another researcher, for example, through refereed peer reviewing

• maliciously accusing a researcher of RCR violations

• hampering inappropriately the work of another researcher

• misleading the general public by publicly presenting deceptive or distorted information concerning one’s own research results or the scientific importance or applicability of those results


FINNISH PROCEDURE

• allegation of a violation of good scientific practice is handled at the organization in which the suspect research has primarily been conducted

• most relevant to legal protection in the process are:– fairness and impartiality – the hearing of all parties concerned – a speedy process


FINNISH PROCEDURE

The investigation procedure for alleged violations of the responsible conduct of research involves three steps:

1. a written notification2. a preliminary inquiry3. the investigation proper

A suspect or a complainant dissatisfied with the procedure used, the inquiry, the investigation or the final report can request TENK to give its opinion.


THE PROCEDURE FOR HANDLING ALLEGATIONS OF MISCONDUCT IN FINLAND


THE PROCESS OF ISSUING STATEMENTS BY TENK


PERSONS INVOLVED IN AN INQUIRY 1/3

• the person suspected of a violation• the person alleging a violation (the complainant)• the "victim" of a violation (who can also be the

complainant)• the person who has received or conveyed a report

of a violation• the head of the research organization responsible

for conducting an enquiry, such as the rector of a university, who is responsible for making decisions and covering the costs of the inquiry process



• the person who is responsible for preparing the matter, such as a university lawyer

• the person who is responsible for conducting a preliminary investigation

• the organization's ethical board (if one exists)• the members of a board of inquiry, at least one of

whom must come from outside the organization in question



• other experts• other interested parties• the Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity

TENK, which must be informed of the inquiry• any body responsible for imposing sanctions, such as

a university department.


THE PIECES OF THE PUZZLE

• the person suspected of a violation• the complainant• the alleged violation• the study in question (under way, completed or

published)• the publication channel or how the violation came

to light• the organization conducting the inquiry• the Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity

TENK


TENK CAN ASK A RESERCH ORGANISATION

FOR AN EXPLANATION IF

• doing so is in the public interest• attention has been drawn to an alleged

violation, for example in the media• an anonymous complaint has been made• a decision made by a research organization

appears faulty or raises questions, even if a statement has not been requested


Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity, TENK

Secretary General Sanna Kaisa Spoof

Snellmaninkatu 13, FI-00170 Helsinki, Finlande-mail: [email protected]

www.tenk.fi

CONTACT DETAILS

http://www.tenk.fi/

finnish advisory board on research integrity (tenk)

Documents

scientific research

research results

research community

research integrity tenkfounded

advancing research ethics

finnish learned societies

handling misconduct

responsible fashion