ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesPublication ethics

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

French National Charter for Research Integrity (Codes | 2015)0

Posted by Admin in on April 7, 2018

In the knowledge and innovation society marked by acceleration in the construction and transmission of knowledge and by international competitiveness, public higher education and research institutions and universities are in a privileged position to address current and future challenges. They are responsible for the production, transmission and utilisation of knowledge and contribute to the implementation of a qualified expertise in public decision­making processes. However, the application of this major responsibility implies consolidating trust relationship between research and society.

The French National Charter for Research Integrity clarifies the professional responsibilities ensuring a rigorous and trustworthy scientific approach, and will apply in the context of all national and international partnerships.

This Charter is well aligned with the main international texts in this field: the European Charter for Researchers (2005); the Singapore Statement on Research Integrity (2010); the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ESF-ALLEA, 2011 ). The Charter falls within the reference framework put forward in the European research and innovation programme, HORIZON 2020.

Access the Charter

Ask The Chefs: Where Does Open Access Go From Here? – Scholarly Kitchen (Ann Michael | October 2017)0

Posted by Admin in on April 4, 2018

Open Access (OA) publishing is continuing to grow. Based on our most recent research and analysis, Delta Think estimates the OA market at approximately $470M in 2016, up from $390M in 2015. It is also no secret that OA volume as a percentage of total market volume (estimated at 20-22%) is much higher than OA revenue as a percentage of total market revenue (4-9%).

But what does this all mean? For publishers, those could be scary numbers, analogous to the revenue declines seen when print advertising decreased as online advertising increased, but at much lower revenue levels. For OA advocates, is this shift producing the accessibility and openness they had hoped for? For libraries, is OA reducing their cost while increasing access? Where do preprints fit in? What about the entire research process, versus article publishing only?

In anticipation of Open Access Week, we asked the Chefs: Where does Open Access go from here?

Read the rest of this discussion piece

(Norway) Guidelines for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences, Humanities, Law and Theology – NESH (Guidelines | 2016)0

Posted by Admin in on April 3, 2018

The three National Research Ethics Committees (NEM, NENT and NESH) were established in 1990, based on the Proposition to the Storting No. 28 (1988–1989) Om forskning. In 2007, the Research Ethics Act provided a legal mandate for the three committees and also for the establishment of a National Commission for the Investigation of Research Misconduct. With effect from 1 January 2013, the Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees (FEK) was established as an independent administrative agency under the Ministry of Education and Research. The three committees and the commission are part of the admin- istrative agency, and they all have a central role promoting research ethics in the national research system.

The National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH) is an impartial advisory body established to provide guidelines for research ethics and to promote good and responsible research.

The first version of NESH’s guidelines was adopted in 1993 and later amended in 1999 and 2006. The present round of revision has been discussed in NESH since 2013, and a new version was sent on national consultation in May 2015. This is the fourth edition of NESH’s Guidelines for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences, Humanities, Law and Theology.1…


Research ethics
Ethical guidelines and legislation
Other institutions and authorities

A) Research, society and ethics
1 Norms and values of research
2 Freedom of research
3 Responsibility of research
4 Responsibility of institutions

B) Respect for individuals
5 Human dignity
6 Privacy
7 Duty to inform
8 Consent and obligation to notify
9 Confidentiality
10 Limited re-use
11 Storage of personal data
12 Responsibility for avoiding harm
13 Respect for third parties
14 Protection of children
15 Respect for privacy and family life
16 Respect for the values and motives of others
17 Respect for posthumous reputations
18 Defining roles and responsibilities

C) Respect for groups and institutions
19 Respect for private interests
20 Respect for public administration
21 Respect for vulnerable groups
22 Preservation of cultural monuments and remains
23 Research on other cultures
24 Limits on cultural recognition

D) The research community
25 Co-authorship
26 Good citation practice
27 Plagiarism
28 Scientific integrity
29 Data sharing
30 Impartiality
31 Relations with colleagues
32 The student-supervisor relationship 32 33 Responsibilities of supervisors and project managers 33

E) Commissioned research
34 Different types of research
35 Commissioned research
36 The responsibility of researchers in large projects
37 Independence and conflict of interests
38 Transparency in research funding
39 Presentation and use of results
40 Right and duty to publish

F) Dissemination of research
41 Dissemination as an academic responsibility
42 Requirements for individuals and institutions
43 Interdisciplinary discourse and public deliberation
44 Participation in public debate
45 Accountability in dissemination
46 Reporting results to participants

Norwegian National Research Ethics Committees (2016) Guidelines for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences, Humanities, Law and Theology.

Addressing research misconduct and detrimental research practices: current knowledge and issues (Books: NAP | 2017)0

Posted by Admin in on March 30, 2018

The integrity of knowledge that emerges from research is based on individual and collective adherence to core values of objectivity, honesty, openness, fairness, accountability, and stewardship. Integrity in science means that the organizations in which research is conducted encourage those involved to exemplify these values in every step of the research process. Understanding the dynamics that support – or distort – practices that uphold the integrity of research by all participants ensures that the research enterprise advances knowledge.

The 1992 report Responsible Science: Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process evaluated issues related to scientific responsibility and the conduct of research. It provided a valuable service in describing and analyzing a very complicated set of issues, and has served as a crucial basis for thinking about research integrity for more than two decades. However, as experience has accumulated with various forms of research misconduct, detrimental research practices, and other forms of misconduct, as subsequent empirical research has revealed more about the nature of scientific misconduct, and because technological and social changes have altered the environment in which science is conducted, it is clear that the framework established more than two decades ago needs to be updated.

Responsible Science served as a valuable benchmark to set the context for this most recent analysis and to help guide the committee’s thought process. Fostering Integrity in Research identifies best practices in research and recommends practical options for discouraging and addressing research misconduct and detrimental research practices.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Addressing research misconduct and detrimental research practices: current knowledge and issues. In:  Fostering Integrity of Research. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2017.