Principles of Research Integrity

Home/Principles of Research Integrity

Does protecting human participants privacy open a backdoor to research misconduct?

Karen, a psychology student, conducted a research project that involved the interview of a number of human participants. In compliance with the university rules on protection of human subjects in research, she assured the subjects that the contents of interview and their personal data would be used only for purposes of the research. When inputting the research data, all subjects are referred to only by code instead of their real names. But then Karen made up words which the subjects never spoke/used  in order to

Categories: Abuse of Data, Honesty, Research Misconduct|

Why is keeping original records so important?

Data recording and protection are discussed specially in the Office of Research Integrity’s Introduction to Responsible Conduct of Research. (s.6b & s. 6c) It details how hardcopy or electronic evidence should be recorded and stored respectively. These are also emphasised in the policy on research integrity of a number of educational institutions. For example, in the Guidelines for Responsible Conduct of Research, it is stated that “If mistakes are to be corrected, a thin line should be drawn through the erroneous entry so as not

Categories: Duty of Care, Good Research Practices, Proper Data Handling|

You did the research, but do you own the data?

As a researcher, have you ever considered whether you have the ownership to the data you may have complied and based your research on? In the Office of Research Integrity’s Introduction to the Responsible Conduct of Research, the issue of data ownership is named as an unresolved and controversial issue in data management. (Section 6e.) The term ownership in this context entails both the possession of and responsibility for information. The possession implies the control over its access, creation, modification and etc., and the right

Categories: Duty of Care, Proper Data Handling|

Should you accept a funding opportunity limited by conditions imposed by the sponsor?

Professor Peter Miller and others apply the PERIL analysis to determine if a funding opportunity which is accompanied by conditions should be accepted. Case study: PERIL analysis of a funding opportunity limited by conditions imposed by a collaborating organisation A residential rehabilitation charity approaches you to collaborate in an application to fund doctoral research into the long-term effect of its project. The charity reports that it has been involved in research previously and has found it beneficial. The methodology is discussed and agreed. The application

Categories: Case Studies, Duty of Care, Objectivity|Tags: |

Should you accept research funding from a tobacco company?

Peter Miller and others apply the PERIL analysis proposed by Peter Adams to determine if research funding offered by a tobacco company should be accepted. Case study: Funding opportunity from a tobacco company A university-based School of Medicine distributes an email announcing to all faculty and staff the availability of a new research funding opportunity. The announcement reads: "Please see the link below for an available funding opportunity from the Philip Morris External Research Foundation". The website invited scientists to submit funding proposals to Philip

Categories: Case Studies, Duty of Care|Tags: |

The importance of formal procedures to deal with allegations of research misconduct

Professor Richard Epstein (University of Chicago Law School) has written an article in which he emphasises the importance of "established and settled institutional arrangements" (rather than "sloppy and ad hoc procedures") to investigate allegations of research misconduct in each university. Epstein points out that there should be no appearance of bias by the person(s) responsible for the investigation. Referring to his own experience in shaping the procedures at the University of Chicago, he writes that: "in order to avoid any risk of bias, the appointment of the

Categories: Abuse of Data, Accountability, Case Studies, Plagiarism and Self-plagiarism, Proper Data Handling, Publication-related Conduct, Reporting Irresponsible Research Practices, Research Misconduct|Tags: , , |

Useful resource: Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI)

CITI (Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative) is an online research integrity and ethics training resource available to HKU staff and research postgraduate students (RPGs). Six courses are available to HKU staff and RPGs: Responsible Conduct of Research for Clinical Investigators Social and Behavioural Responsible Conduct of Research Course Physical Science/Non-Clinical Responsible Conduct of Research Humanities Responsible Conduct of Research Course Responsible Conduct of Research for Engineers and Architects Responsible Conduct of Research for Research Services Staff Information on how to access CITI as a HKU staff member/RPG

Categories: Case Studies, Nurturing Students|Tags: , , , |

How should researchers procure goods and services?

Prof. Mark Israel (Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services) has kindly given permission for this hypothetical case study to be reproduced. Simon has been awarded a grant by the UGC. The research will require him to purchase services from interpreters, travel agents, and employ research assistants. He suspects that he might get the best deal from his wife's translation agency, his brother's travel agency, and the daughter of a senior manager at the UGC, who topped the class in the relevant area, is looking for

Categories: Case Studies, Disclosure of Conflict of Interest, Honesty, Non-Disclosure of Potential Conflict of Interest, Objectivity|Tags: , |

Should you accept conference honoraria/travel funding from a sponsor?

Professor Peter Miller (School of Psychology, Deakin University) and others argue in an article that researchers should be aware that their objectivity might be compromised if they accept honoraria and travel funds from a sponsor that funds industry-favourable research. Also, they highlight the opportunities to fraternise with industry executives at such conferences. They give the example of the alcohol industry sponsoring academics to attend conferences, at which industry executives have the opportunity to meet researchers. Miller and others argue that, because the alcohol industry funds

Categories: Case Studies, Disclosure of Conflict of Interest, Non-Disclosure of Potential Conflict of Interest, Objectivity|Tags: , |

Should you peer review an article written by a former colleague?

Prof. Mark Israel (Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services) has kindly given permission for this hypothetical case study to be reproduced. Karen is asked by a journal to review an article written by a former colleague. They have not co-authored together, though they did discuss doing so once. They are both in the same very narrow field of specialisation and have found themselves repeatedly competing for the same jobs around the world. This article appears to be covering similar ground to the work Karen recently

Categories: Case Studies, Disclosure of Conflict of Interest, Non-Disclosure of Potential Conflict of Interest, Objectivity, Plagiarism and Self-plagiarism, Publication-related Conduct|Tags: , , |