Research Misconduct

Home/Research Misconduct

Should you publish new articles similar to previous ones?

Prof. Mark Israel (Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services) has kindly given permission for this hypothetical case study to be reproduced. Mark is seen as an expert in his field of research ethics and research integerity. He is repeatedly invited to write chapters for edited research collections. The requests often ask him to draft similar articles to ones he has already published, albeit with changes to the jurisdiction or disciplinary mix. How should he plan his publication strategy? Commentary (by Dexter Leung) In the HKU

Categories: Case Studies, Honesty, Plagiarism and Self-plagiarism, Publication-related Conduct|Tags: |

CityU researcher convicted after failure to disclose interest

Facts The researcher was an associate professor in the Department of Asian and International Studies at the City University of Hong Kong (CityU). She was also Associate Director of the Southeast Asian Research Centre (SARC) at CityU. In 2006, SARC obtained a grant of HK$53 million from the British Government to conduct a research project, 'Women's Empowerment in Muslim Contexts'. The Defendant (D) was the main person responsible for the project. D requested quotations from four service providers for the supply of IT services for the project,

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

How do you agree on authorship with fellow researchers?

Prof. Mark Israel (Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services) has kindly given permission for this hypothetical case study to be reproduced. You have been invited to join a multinational, multidisciplinary U21 collaborative team looking at the impact of Free Trade Agreements on the working practices of lawyers. While the project is being established, the team start to allocate responsibility for possible research outputs. Various suggestions are made about who should be authors. You hear the following comments: * In my discipline, the whole research team

Categories: Acknowledgement, Case Studies, Improper Ascription of Authorship|Tags: , , |

Should students offer co-authorship to their supervisors?

Prof. Mark Israel (Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services) has kindly given permission for this hypothetical case study to be reproduced. Wing Hong is a PhD student. Following a suggestion from his supervisor, Maggy, he writes an article for publication. Maggy provides extensive comments. The article is accepted subject to revision and, again, Maggy provides comments and hands over a draft of an article she is writing. Wing Hong uses material from this article and offers Maggy co-authorship. Should she accept? Wing Hong's second supervisor,

Categories: Acknowledgement, Case Studies, Improper Ascription of Authorship, Nurturing Students, Principles of Research Integrity, Publication-related Conduct|Tags: , , |

How do you avoid conflicts between academic and other commitments?

Prof. Mark Israel (Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services) has kindly given permission for this hypothetical case study to be reproduced. Nolan has a number of commercial clients who have interests in international trusts. In his position as an academic, he has been asked to advise the Hong Kong government on whether or how these should be subject to anti-avoidance rules. He has been asked to avoid any conflicts of interest over this period. What activities might be incompatible with this position? See: Conflict of

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

Conflict of interest and suppression of legitimate results by a sponsor – a COPE case study

One case study from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) website (http://publicationethics.org/case/attempt-supress-legitimate-scientific-results): The journal is operated by institute A, and the editor is an employee of institute A. A manuscript was submitted late in 2014 by authors from institute B, a similar type of organisation in the same country. The manuscript was reviewed by two referees who both recommended publication following minor revision. One of the reviewers noted that the abstract contained a vague statement related to the effectiveness of a treatment for a major

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

Legitimate authorship – a survey of educational researchers in Hong Kong

Professor Bruce Macfarlane conducted research into the perceptions among educational researchers in Hong Kong of the ethics of multiple authorship (namely what constitutes legitimate authorship). In October/November 2014, a link to an online questionnaire was sent by e-mail to academic staff with professorial and research track positions in Schools or Faculties of Education in Hong Kong. 108 responses were collected, representing a response rate of 36.1% of the 299 education academics employed in Schools or Faculties of Education in Hong Kong. Case studies in the

Categories: Acknowledgement, Case Studies, Improper Ascription of Authorship|Tags: , |

What constitutes authorship – a COPE case study

One case study from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) website (http://publicationethics.org/case/what-constitutes-authorship):   Author X submitted a paper to another journal, and included author Y, a student in the same institute, as a courtesy. Author Y had drawn two figures for the paper and discussed some of the observations (all made by author X) with author X but the paper did not deal with the thesis research of author Y. After the original paper was returned, requiring extensive revisions, author X revised the paper and

Categories: Acknowledgement, Case Studies, Improper Ascription of Authorship|Tags: |

References on Authorship

The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) has published a Discussion Document titled 'What constitutes authorship?' drawing upon a variety of sources: http://publicationethics.org/files/Authorship_DiscussionDocument.pdf The COPE Discussion Document recognises that authorship in the legal discipline is: still very much a product of the writing process, and usually by a single individual. Any other form of contribution such as generation of ideas, commenting on a draft, or technical assistance is listed in the Acknowledgments. Traditions in the humanities also differ from some disciplines in the social and natural

Categories: Acknowledgement, Improper Ascription of Authorship|Tags: |

ICMJE Recommendations: Authorship Criteria

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations list 4 criteria for authorship (http://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html): 1) Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND 2) Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; AND 3) Final approval of the version to be published; AND 4) Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part

Categories: Acknowledgement, Improper Ascription of Authorship, Policies, Publication-related Conduct|Tags: |