Research Integrity The Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research Dr Peter Wigley Manager, Research Ethics and Integrity Flinders University

Why? DVCR-initiated training All researchers (staff and students), and research support staff, should be familiar with the Code, and understand their responsibilities under the Code Condition of our funding from ARC and NHMRC that we comply with the Code Seminar in all 14 Schools at Flinders this year Today: overview of that overview

Research Integrity The responsible conduct of research Research misconduct Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (ARC, NHMRC & Universities Australia, 2007) Part A: Principles and Practices to Encourage Responsible Research Part B: Breaches of The Code, Research Misconduct, and the Framework for Resolving Allegations

The Code – Part A Principles and Practices to Encourage Responsible Research 1.General Principles of Responsible Research 2.Management of Research Data and Primary Materials 3.Supervision of Research Trainees 4.Publication and Dissemination of Research Findings 5.Authorship 6.Peer Review 7.Conflicts of Interest 8.Collaborative Research Across Institutions

A – 2. Management of Research Data and Primary Materials RESPONSIBILITIES OF INSTITUTIONS Retain research data and primary materials Identify ownership Provide safe and secure storage Ensure security and confidentiality of access RESPONSIBILITIES OF RESEARCHERS Retain research data and primary materials Manage storage Maintain confidentiality See guidelines in the Code for different categories of research data – generally: minimum of 5 years retention after publication

A – 5. Authorship RESPONSIBILITIES OF INSTITUTIONS Have criteria for authorship (reflecting the Code) RESPONSIBILITIES OF RESEARCHERS Follow criteria / policies on authorship Agree on authorship (as early as possible) Include all eligible authors Do not allow unacceptable inclusions of authorship (e.g. ‘honourary’) Acknowledge other contributions fairly Extend the authorship policy to web-based publications Maintain signed acknowledgments of authorship for all publications – original, hand-written signatures (if possible; or / fax)

Authorship Criteria Attribution of authorship depends to some extent on the discipline, but in all cases, authorship must be based on substantial contributions in a combination (2 or 3) of: Conception and design of the project Analysis and interpretation of research data Drafting significant parts of the work or critically revising it so as to contribute to the interpretation

The Code – Part B Breaches of The Code, Research Misconduct, and the Framework for Resolving Allegations 9.Breaches of the Code and Misconduct 10.Concepts and Definitions 11.Responsibilities 12.The Framework for Resolving Allegations

B – 1. Concepts and Definitions Breach is a less serious deviation from the Code that is appropriately remedied within the institution. Research Misconduct is a more serious or deliberate deviation, involving: Intent and deliberation, recklessness, or gross and persistent negligence Serious consequences, such as false information on the public record, or adverse effects on research participants, animals or the environment. Examples of Misconduct Plagiarism, fabrication, falsification (data manipulation) Failure to declare or manage a serious conflict of interest Failure to follow research proposals approved by an Ethics Committee Wilful concealment or facilitation of research misconduct by others Misconduct can cause considerable collateral damage

B – 2. Responsibilities A number of people have responsibilities for resolving allegations of breaches of the Code and research misconduct, including: CEO – Vice-Chancellor, who has overall responsibility for the process Delegated Officer – DVCR (Prof David Day) Designated Person – Director, Research Services (Dr Gayle Morris), who receives a written allegation, conducts a preliminary investigation to assess the allegation, and provides advice to the Delegated Officer Manager, Research Ethics and Integrity, who assists the Designated Person Research Integrity Advisors, appointed by the institution to advise those making, or considering making, allegations Head of Department, School or Research Centre/Institute Research supervisors Researchers & support staff

B – 3. Handling Allegations Breaches of the Code that do not constitute research misconduct should, as far as possible, be handled at the School/Department level. Research Misconduct If alleged, and an informal investigation supports the allegation, then a formal inquiry will be conducted (decided by DVCR/VC) This inquiry may involve external panel members Consequences Misconduct established or not Disciplinary action

Flinders Policies Currently Policy on Research Practice + Research Higher Degrees, Intellectual Property, etc New Policies, under review Responsible Conduct of Research (overarching policy) Publication and Peer Review Authorship Management of Research Data and Primary Materials Research Misconduct Allegations P&S updating the Conflict of Interest Policy OGR updating the Research Higher Degrees Policy

Researcher Support Supervisors / Managers Department / School Heads Research Integrity Advisors – Faculties DVCR Research Services Office: Director, Research Services Manager, Research Ethics and Integrity RSO webpages being revamped RSO Data Team: publications, ERA, HERDC Data Management Support – Amanda Nixon, Library