1. Research Misconduct Group 6; Giane Benvinda Damas Wenxig Yang
Javier Cruz
Yi Ren
Linus von Fieandt
12/4/2018
Ethics

2. RESEARCH MISCONDUCT Fabrication Falsification Plagiarism
Dishonesty towards funding bodies
Exaggeration of one’s qualifications
Publication of the same study in multiple contexts
Sexual harassment
Defamation of colleagues
Sabotage of colleagues’ work
12/4/2018
Ethics

3. RESEARCH MISCONDUCT Fabrication Falsification Plagiarism Conscious
Misunderstanding, Carelessness vs Conscious
Conscious
Text, Ideas, Contributions
Modify, Leave data out
Distinguish between intentional fraudulent behaviour vs
carelessness, rushed work and incompetence
Definition from Swedish Research Council’s expert group
Actions or omissions in research, which – consciously or through carelessness – lead to falsified or manipulated results or give misleading information about someone’s contribution to the research
12/4/2018
Ethics

4. IMPACT Undermines the pillars of science
Confidence in published scientific results
(Researchers, providers of funding, industry….)
Trust in the merit system – Competence, be the best
Risk of spreading misconduct - Temptation to turn to such methods
, the Office of Research Integrity received a total of 3,571 reports
Various surveys indicate this is just the tip of the iceberg
12/4/2018
Ethics

5. PREVENTION Publish or perish culture
Researchers operate in a highly competitive environment.
Publications are the most essential merit for applicants and funding.
This can tempt researchers to strive for quantity rather than quality.
Most crucial is to work to create a good research environment, characterized by a culture that does not tolerate research misconduct and that promotes good practice
Discussion of issues about bad practice – Make aware
Supervisor as example
Open work rather than working isolated – Share load
12/4/2018
Ethics

6. Best is to prevent? SANCTIONS
Accusation - Huge impact on researcher’s career
Very difficult to prove in most cases
Swedish Research Council
Office of Research Integrity
Best is to prevent?
12/4/2018
Ethics

7. Problem presentation
Unpublished results presented at an international conference (by a PhD. Student)
A short time after the conference another researcher (conference attendee) publishes these exact results
Despite no earlier work in this exact field
Strong suspicion of plagiarism/theft
12/4/2018
Ethics

8. Descision
Do not present unpublished results !
12/4/2018
Ethics

9. OLE analysis Consequences of the decision?
There will fewer students able to participate in international conferences, thereby a lower possibility of spreading the knowledge obtained in the research. Thus the research group will get less publicity and possibly less funding.
At large society will be affected by a slower pace of knowledge sharing and research will progress slower.
The desire and purpose of research is to spread the knowledge. Fewer presentations at conferences will lead to a lesser output of knowledge.
12/4/2018
Ethics

10. OLE analysis State clearly that the presented work is not published.
Are there any alternatives to the solution and what would be the impact?
State clearly that the presented work is not published.
Create a good, open research environment
It promotes good practice and collaboration which would share the work load. In that way the publish or perish culture could be killed.
12/4/2018
Ethics