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

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesResearch Misconduct

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Indexing by Bibliographic Databases of Journals Published in the Developing World (Papers: Aamir Raoof Memon and Ahmed Waqas | 2017)0

Posted by Admin in on July 15, 2017


The taking-down of Beall’s blog/list has been rightfully mourned as a resource lost to the research community (especially for HDRs and other ECRs) but it is worth noting that so called ‘blacklists’ can erroneously classify some publishers as predatory. This paper reflects on such errors from developing countries.

The removal of Beall’s blog may result in increased numbers of predatory journals and their subsequent victims. Recognizing this, the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) suggested criteria for identifying predatory journals in a statement issued on February 18, 2017. These criteria may be helpful in the current scenario of scientific publishing. However, a few lapses and limitations need to be taken into account when translating these policies to the situation in developing countries. This letter presents several cases of legitimate journals and platforms from the developing world that may be erroneously categorized as predatory according to the WAME criteria. We also suggest some improvements in these journals’ policies.

Indexing and abstracting, Journalism, Predatory, Research ethics

Memon, A.R. & Waqas A (2017) Indexing by Bibliographic Databases of Journals Published in the Developing World. Science and Engineering Ethics. doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9898-y

Fostering Integrity in Research – The National Academies Press (Resource Material | 2017)0

Posted by Admin in on July 11, 2017


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 experience of the past several decades shows that it may be insufficient to rely on classroom or online education as the primary tool to address research misconduct.”

The AHRECS team agree and believe this reinforces that research integrity professional development needs to be more than compliance-driven transfer of information. Researchers need to develop skills and attributes associated with research integrity and that means practical discipline-, methodology-, institution- and jurisdiction-specific resource material and policies.

That’s why our services include desktop audits, drafting policy/resource material, and facilitating the creation of hypotheticals and case studies relevant to specific contexts (from Science at an Australian national research organisation, to Creative Arts at a Queensland university, Law in Hong Kong to Social Sciences in Taiwan and Health Sciences in Vietnam), as well as to institutions as a whole (a leading NSW university).

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.

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017) Fostering Integrity in Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi:

Doing Global Science: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in the Global Research Enterprise – IAP (InterAcademy Partnership)0

Posted by Admin in on July 10, 2017


A global research enterprise has emerged over the past several decades as significantly more research is being performed in a growing number of countries by a larger cohort of researchers. International and interdisciplinary linkages in research are expanding rapidly, with more papers being coauthored by in- vestigators based in di erent countries and representing dif- ferent elds. More researchers are crossing borders for educa- tion and training. e new knowledge produced by the global research enterprise promises to expand our understanding of the natural world and to accelerate progress in meeting hu- manity’s needs in areas such as health, the environment, and economic development.

A great global resource for researchers who are collaborating with colleagues who are based in countries that don’t have their own research integrity frameworks.

However, irresponsible behavior and poor practices pose threats to the global research enterprise, could impair its e ec- tive functioning, and could even damage the broader credibility of science. High-pro le cases of data fabrication and other irre- sponsible behavior continue to appear around the world. Issues related to journal article retractions and the reproducibility of research results are a racting greater a ention.
Opportunities for researchers to contribute to society are also expanding rapidly. Scientists are increasingly called upon to demonstrate vigilance aimed at preventing the deliberate misuse of research in the life sciences and other elds and to contribute to society as policy advisors and as communicators of scienti c ideas and ndings to the broad public.


IAP (InterAcademy Partnership). 2016. Doing Global Science: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in the Global Research Enterprise. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Responsible Conduct in the Global Research Enterprise: A Policy Report – IAC-IAP (InterAcademy Council and InterAcademy Panel)0

Posted by Admin in on July 10, 2017

IAP in Brief

• Launched in 1993

• Comprised of 105 academies

• Receives core funding from the Italian government

• Hosted by TWAS, the academy of sciences for the developing world

• Located in Trieste, Italy

IAP is a global network of the world’s science acade- mies, launched in 1993. Its primary goal is to help member academies work together to advise citizens and public of cials on the scienti c aspects of critical global issues.

IAP is particularly interested in assisting young and small academies achieve these goals and, through the communication links and networks created by IAP activities, all academies will be able to raise both their public pro le among citizens and their in uence among policy makers.

IAP Objectives are:

To position IAP as a recognized and independent provider of high-quality global science advice.
To initiate and support programs on capacity buil- ding, science education, and science communication.
To take a leading role in efforts to improve the effecti- veness of international science cooperation.

IAC-IAP (InterAcademy Council and InterAcademy Panel). 2012. Responsible Conduct in the Global Research Enterprise: A Policy Report. Amsterdam: InterAcademy Council and IAP-the global network of science academies.