19 Scientific research integrity as a matter of transparency

2013 ◽  
pp. 235-239
BMJ ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 345 (oct18 3) ◽  
pp. e7023-e7023
Author(s):  
B. Roehr

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 5
Author(s):  
Vera Treis Trindade ◽  
Gabriel Gerber Hornink ◽  
Eduardo Galembeck ◽  
Bayardo Baptista Torres

Editorial 2016 – 2 – Especial EventosA área de Educação em Bioquímica (K) está inserida nas Reuniões Anuais da Sociedade Brasileira de Bioquímica e Biologia Molecular a mais de vinte anos. Em 2001, a SBBq reconhecendo o crescimento da área patrocinou o lançamento da Revista Brasileira de Ensino de Bioquímica e Biologia Molecular (RBEBBM). Este apoio contínuo estimulou a reestruturação da revista com ampliação do escopo, equipe de trabalho e internacionalização e alteração de nome para Revista de Ensino de Bioquímica (REB) ou (Journal of Biochemistry Education). Na 45ª Reunião, realizada em Natal, RN, no período de 18 a 21 de junho de 2016, 14 resumos foram inscritos, os quais estão publicados neste número da REB. As sessões de cartazes ocorreram nos dias 20 de junho (K-01 a K-07) e 21 de junho (K-08 a K-014). Os autores discutiram seus resultados com visitantes e avaliadores da SBBq que elegeram como melhor cartaz o K10 (Development of an interactive software to study energetic metabolism - Emanuella da Silva Cardoso, Patrícia Burth, Cátia Lacerda Sodré – Universidade Federal Fluminense).Durante o evento ocorreu o simpósio “Teaching Research Integrity? Let Us Count the Ways” organizado pela Dra Martha M Sorenson (Instituto de Bioquímica Médica, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro) com os seguintes participantes:- Harold Ray Garner Jr, Medical Informatics, Translation, Training and Ethics (MITTE) Office, Virginia Tech, USA: Finding and Learning from Ethical Breaches by Scientists- Marcela Sorelli, Universidade Federal do ABC (UFABC): Research Integrity at UFABC- André L. Pinto, Centro Bras. Pesquisa Física (CBPF): Difficulties and Advances in Teaching Good Practices in Scientific Research- Rosemary S.A.Shinkai, Fac. Odontologia, PUCRS: The Building Blocks of a Research Integrity Culture in the University Paralelamente às atividades científicas, a SBBq disponibilizou um espaço na área dos expositores para a que Revista de Ensino de Bioquímica fizesse a sua divulgação a partir de banners e material publicitário detalhando os diferentes modelos submissões.Além disto, o estande serviu de ponto de encontro para troca de experiências de ensino-aprendizagem em Bioquímica e Biologia Molecular e áreas correlacionadas focalizando, principalmente, as tecnologias do entretenimento e design (TED). Nesta reunião, a REB foi representada pela Profa. Dra. Vera Maria Treis Trindade (UFRGS), pelas estudantes Thanuci Silva (Unicamp) e Mayara Lustosa de Oliveira (Mayara IF-Goiano-Cristalina- Unicamp). Atenciosamente,Gabriel G. HorninkUnifal-MGVera Maria T. TrindadeUFRGSEduardo GalembeckUnicampBayardo B. TorresUSP


Author(s):  
Muna Telha

ABSTRACT The study of scientific research integrity, critical thought, standards of evaluating assumptions and commitment to COPE represents the third constituent of HIEPs: High Impact Educational Practices. It is a twodimensional study that focuses on the relationship between integrity and the actual level of commitment to Code of Publication Ethics among the post graduate students in Northern Border University. This study commences with a brief investigation of the positive scientific research reality and expose the role of COPE-based acquired skills to enhance students’ research and scientific research skills in post graduate studies. By following a qualitative analysis methodology, post graduate students’ research orientations are compiled, studied and interpreted. The findings of this study will contribute to increasing scientific research integrity and the scientific responsibility of all; and more importantly, this responsibility would be shared by students and supervisors who want to ethically carry out scientific research supervision to enhance integrity.


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Octavian Andronic

What is Ethics? The definition of ethics revolves around the concept of morality. Ethics is defined as a set of moral principles that govern a person's actions. Or as the philosophy of morality. Or as the discipline that defines, guides, or describes what is good and bad, right and wrong.We may ask ourselves: is ethics of scientific research a science itself? Probably not. Ethics of scientific research refers to the guidelines that define or describe a responsible conduct of research. If we ask for random individuals to tell examples of violations of integrity or research ethics, the most common answers will certainly be: plagiarism and data manipulation. These are, as we all know, the most feared ethic violations that can affect the work of a researcher and can even lead to the end of his career.The issues of ethics and the integrity of research, a more recently introduced term, are in fact issues of greater finesse than these clear and indisputable violations of any system of moral and ethical values. The academic community has focused over the past two decades on many issues of ethics and integrity. Many of the world's states have set up institutions or departments exclusively responsible to study, define and judge ethical issues. In Europe, the first such institute was set up in Finland in 1996, where the first national guide on scientific integrity was drafted.At the same time, on global level, it became clear that there is a need for guidelines and statements to define and standardize, regardless of regional culture and practice, the academic research and publication activities from the point of view of integrity. Therefore, guidelines such as the Helsinki Declaration, the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, the Montreal Statement on Research Integrity, and the Singapore Statement on Research Integrity have been issued.In 2012, the DORA Declaration was written and signed until today by more than 14,000 researchers and over 1400 institutions. The general recommendation of this statement is: "Do not use journal-based metrics, such as Journal Impact Factors, as a substitute measure of the quality of individual research articles, to assess individual contributions, or to hiring, promoting, or funding decisions " This year, I was honored to attend at the 6th edition of The World Conference of Research Integrity, which took place in Hong Kong in early June and gathered participants from all over the world. The statement made on this occasion is titled: The Hong Kong Manifesto for Assessing Researchers: Fostering Research Integrity. It discusses one of the most current issues in research: assessing researchers and their outcomes. This manifesto proposes 5 principles accompanied by references for each and implementation suggestions. These five principles are:1. Assess researchers based on responsible practices in all aspects of the research enterprise2. Value the reporting of all research, regardless of the results and reward honest and transparent reporting3. Value the practice of open science4.Value and broad range of research activities, such as innovation, replication, synthesis, and meta-research5. Value and range of other contributions to research, such as peer review for grants and publications, and mentoring In Romania, in 2016, a number of minimal criteria for academic promotion have been proposed that have become mandatory since 2017. For the field of medicine, the minimum criteria only take into account the publishing activity from the SCIE database of the Web of Science (Clarivate Analitycs) and are based on the hirsch index, the cumulative impact factor and the total number of published articles. Thus, we can observe that in Romania, as in many other countries of the world, the minimum criteria violate both the recommendations of the DORA Declaration and the Hong Kong Manifesto, being based on quantitative metrics or metrics that are not intended for the assessment of researchers and taking into account only a small sector of a researcher's entire scientific activity.In conclusion, the latest trends in integrity research focuses on the transparency and objectivity of the process of evaluating both researchers and research. There is a global care for the objectivity of academic evaluation and promotion processes, the rational use of scientometric parameters as well as for the evaluation of the quality of research and its impact both at scientific and social levels.


Bioethica ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
Κωνσταντίνος Χαριτίδης (Constantinos Charitidis) ◽  
Ηλίας Κούμουλος (Elias Koumoulos) ◽  
Παναγιώτης Κάβουρας (Panagiotis Kavouras) ◽  
Μιχάλης Κρητικός (Michalis Kritikos) ◽  
Τίνα Γκαράνη-Παπαδάτου (Tina Garani-Papadatos)

Research integrity is an essential and integral part of scientific research ethics. It is commonly accepted that the value of scientific research vitally depends on the fulfillment of research integrity codes of conduct. The unbreakable linkage (relation) between research value and research integrity does not reflect only its attachment to the application of proper scientific method but also its acceptance from the society. In this work we present a survey on the organization of the institutions of research integrity in international, European and national level. Emphasis is given in the description of the present state in Greece in the level of Higher Educational Institutes, Research Centers and Committees. Also, we focus on the actions taken from National Technical University of Athens, as well as the initiative from EARTHnet network and their efforts for institutionalization of a common code of conduct in scientific research at a national level.


1966 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 188-189
Author(s):  
T. J. Deeming

If we make a set of measurements, such as narrow-band or multicolour photo-electric measurements, which are designed to improve a scheme of classification, and in particular if they are designed to extend the number of dimensions of classification, i.e. the number of classification parameters, then some important problems of analytical procedure arise. First, it is important not to reproduce the errors of the classification scheme which we are trying to improve. Second, when trying to extend the number of dimensions of classification we have little or nothing with which to test the validity of the new parameters.Problems similar to these have occurred in other areas of scientific research (notably psychology and education) and the branch of Statistics called Multivariate Analysis has been developed to deal with them. The techniques of this subject are largely unknown to astronomers, but, if carefully applied, they should at the very least ensure that the astronomer gets the maximum amount of information out of his data and does not waste his time looking for information which is not there. More optimistically, these techniques are potentially capable of indicating the number of classification parameters necessary and giving specific formulas for computing them, as well as pinpointing those particular measurements which are most crucial for determining the classification parameters.


2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (5) ◽  
pp. 737-750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Gess ◽  
Christoph Geiger ◽  
Matthias Ziegler

Abstract. Although the development of research competency is an important goal of higher education in social sciences, instruments to measure this outcome often depend on the students’ self-ratings. To provide empirical evidence for the utility of a newly developed instrument for the objective measurement of social-scientific research competency, two validation studies across two independent samples were conducted. Study 1 ( n = 675) provided evidence for unidimensionality, expected differences in test scores between differently advanced groups of students as well as incremental validities over and above self-perceived research self-efficacy. In Study 2 ( n = 82) it was demonstrated that the competency measured indeed is social-scientific and relations to facets of fluid and crystallized intelligence were analyzed. Overall, the results indicate that the test scores reflected a trainable, social-scientific, knowledge-related construct relevant to research performance. These are promising results for the application of the instrument in the evaluation of research education courses in higher education.


1978 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 356-358
Author(s):  
ALCINE POTTS LUKENBACH
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document