Informing recommendations for management of concerns about research misconduct in UK Higher Education: findings from an international scoping exercise.
Irene Fernow
(UK Research and Innovation)
Rachael Gooberman-Hill
(University of Bristol)
Tolulope Ayanbola
(UK Research and InnovationUK Committee on Research Integrity)
Maria Delgado
(UK Committee on Research Integrity)
Louise Dunlop
Paper Short Abstract
A UK Committee on Research Integrity project is generating evidence to inform recommendations for governance of research misconduct in UK Higher Education. Findings comprise information about scale, scope and perceived effectiveness of 24 international models for management of research misconduct.
Paper Abstract
Although there is no evidence base that intentional research misconduct is increasing in the UK, appropriate prevention and management of research misconduct is likely to support trust and confidence in research and the systems that produce it.
Definitions of research misconduct vary internationally, with some broad congruence because of global frameworks. However, systems and structures for management of research misconduct differ considerably, including varied legal arrangements and research environments.
In the UK, research misconduct is defined in the Concordat to Support Research Integrity as including fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, failure to meet legal, ethical and professional obligations, and various forms of misrepresentation. Effective management of research misconduct includes prevention of misconduct and robust processes to address instances when misconduct is alleged to have occurred.
As part of the UK Committee on Research Integrity’s work to develop a rigorous evidence base to underpin recommendations to the UK research sector, we commissioned RAND Europe to gather and analyse information about national and international governance when concerns of research misconduct in Higher Education are raised. One phase of work has been the scoping and characterisation of international approaches to the management of research misconduct allegations. In desk-based work, 24 country approaches have been described, including material relating to their effectiveness. Further scrutiny of approaches in 10 countries, selected for their diversity, includes interviews with stakeholders to understand policies, procedures and resourcing arrangements. This poster presents findings from the international work as a first step in development of recommendations for UK Higher Education.
Accepted Poster
Paper Short Abstract
Paper Abstract
Although there is no evidence base that intentional research misconduct is increasing in the UK, appropriate prevention and management of research misconduct is likely to support trust and confidence in research and the systems that produce it.
Definitions of research misconduct vary internationally, with some broad congruence because of global frameworks. However, systems and structures for management of research misconduct differ considerably, including varied legal arrangements and research environments.
In the UK, research misconduct is defined in the Concordat to Support Research Integrity as including fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, failure to meet legal, ethical and professional obligations, and various forms of misrepresentation. Effective management of research misconduct includes prevention of misconduct and robust processes to address instances when misconduct is alleged to have occurred.
As part of the UK Committee on Research Integrity’s work to develop a rigorous evidence base to underpin recommendations to the UK research sector, we commissioned RAND Europe to gather and analyse information about national and international governance when concerns of research misconduct in Higher Education are raised. One phase of work has been the scoping and characterisation of international approaches to the management of research misconduct allegations. In desk-based work, 24 country approaches have been described, including material relating to their effectiveness. Further scrutiny of approaches in 10 countries, selected for their diversity, includes interviews with stakeholders to understand policies, procedures and resourcing arrangements. This poster presents findings from the international work as a first step in development of recommendations for UK Higher Education.
Poster session
Session 1 Tuesday 1 July, 2025, -