ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)
Search
Generic filters
Exact text matches only
Search into
Filter by Categories
Research integrity
Filter by Categories
Human Research Ethics

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesResearch Misconduct

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Disclosure of interests and management of conflicts of interest (NHMRC An Australian Code (2018) good practice guide | August 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on October 1, 2019
 

A guide supporting the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research

Contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Disclosure of interests 2
2.1 What interests should be disclosed? 2
2.2 What is a conflict of interest? 3
2.3 Identifying and managing conflicts of interest 3

3. Responsibilities of institutions 4
3.1 Develop and promote institutional policy 4
3.2 Provide training for researchers 4
3.3 Manage institutional interests 5

4. Responsibilities of researchers 5
4.1 Disclose interests and comply with relevant policies 5
4.2 Engage in relevant training 6

5. Resolution of disputes 6

6. Breaches of the Code 6

Additional resources 6

Access the good practice guide

Management of Data and Information in Research (NHMRC An Australian Code (2018) good practice guide | June 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on September 29, 2019
 

A guide supporting the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research

aContents

1. Introduction 1

2. Responsibilities of institutions 1
2.1 Provision of training for researchers 2
..2.2 Ownership, stewardship and control of research data and primary materials 2
2.3 Storage, retention and disposal 3
2.4 Safety, security and confidentiality 3
2.5 Access by interested parties 4
2.6 Facilities 4

3. Responsibilities of researchers 4
3.1 Retention and publication 6
3.2 Managing confidential and other sensitive information 7
3.3 Acknowledging the use of others’ data 7
3.4 Engagement with relevant training 7

4. Breaches of the Code 7

Additional Resources 8

Access the good practice guide

(US) Columbia historian stepping down after plagiarism finding – Retraction Watch (Adam Marcus | September 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on September 26, 2019
 

A tenured professor of history at Columbia University will be stepping down at the end of next year after an investigating committee at the school found “incontrovertible evidence of research misconduct” in his controversial 2013 book.

Charles King Armstrong, the Korea Foundation Professor of Korean Studies in the Social Sciences, was found to have “cited nonexistent or irrelevant sources in at least 61 instances” in “Tyranny of the Weak: North Korea and the World, 1950-1992,” according to the Columbia Spectator, which first reported on the resignation last week.

In a September 10 letter, Maya Tolstoy, dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, announced the news to the institution:

Read the rest of this discussion piece

We Need to Talk About Authorship Abuse – Inside Higher Ed (A. Susan Jurow and Jordan Jurow | September 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on September 24, 2019
 

The academic community must move beyond compliance with standards and toward the cultivation of a greater sense of ethical responsibility, argue A. Susan Jurow and Jordan Jurow.

Abuse of authorship is increasingly common in higher education. For example, too many academics are either listing the names of people on papers who have not contributed to those papers or they are not including the names of those who have.

As a result, authorship has become a false signifier of intellectual productivity and authority. And if we allow such authorship abuse to continue unabated, we are abdicating our responsibilities as scholars, furthering distrust in educational institutions and delegitimizing our ability to make knowledge claims that can enable us to effect change.

Simply put, an author is a person who has contributed real and identifiable intellectual labor to earn their position on a paper. Giving credit to those who do not deserve it — or, equally problematic, not crediting those who have done work — compromises the trustworthiness of our research and our honor as scholars. The perversion of authorship is being reproduced through unreflective practice, apprenticeship into inappropriate practices and, at times, outright dishonesty, facilitated by the growing use of problematic metrics of scholarship.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

0