Research Integrity

Share

Resources

​​​​​​​​​​Guidelines
  1. External Research Collaboration
  2. NTU Authorship Guidelines​
  3. Acknowledgements in Research Communications
  4. Research Integrity Grant Conditions
  5. Guidance Note on the Use of ‘TurnItIn’ Plagiarism Checker
  6. Further Guidance on anti-plagiarism checks on Masters and PhD Theses
  7. Guidance Note on Misrepresentation of credentials 
  8. Guidance Note on Image Manipulation
  9. Guidelines on Predatory Journals and Conferences​
  10. Joint Statement on Research Integrity Relating to Scholarly Publications (updated 22 Oct 2018)


Foundational Documents

  1. Singapore Statement on Research Integrity
  2. Montréal Statement on Research Integrity in Cross-Boundary Research Collaborations
  3. Global Research Council Statement of Principles for Research Integrity (May 2013)
  4. Vancouver Protocol​


Other Resources

  1. Retraction Watch
  2. PubPeer
  3. Retraction Watch: Forensics Friday
    This is a weekly series of articles to test your skills in detecting image manipulations using actual cases found in journal publications. 


Reading Materials

  1. Steneck, N.H. (2007) "Introduction to the Responsible Conduct of Research". Retrieved from https://ori.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/rcrintro.pdf
  2. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (2014) "For the Sound Development of Science: The Attitude of a Conscientious Scientist". Retrieved from https://www.jsps.go.jp/j-kousei/data/rinri_e.pdf
  3. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. (2017) "Fostering Integrity in Research". 
  4. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)'s Core Pactices.
  5. ICMJE Recommendations​
  6. ​​​​Everyone needs a data-management plan. Nature 555, 286 (2018). doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-03065-z "They sound dull, but data-management plans are essential, and funders must explain why."
  7. Data management made simple​. Nature 555, 403-405 (2018). doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-03071-1 "Keeping your research data freely available is crucial for open science - and your funding could depend on it."
  8. "​Keeping science honest", by Josefin Sundin and Fredrik Jutfelt. Science, Vol 359, Issue 6383, pp. 1443. doi:10.1126/science.aat3473  
  9. 'UK trials of airway transplants are in limbo​', by Matt Warren. Science, Vol 359, Issue 6383, pp. 1448-1450. doi:10.1126/science.359.6383.1448      ​
  10. The Hague Ethical Guidelines​ for responsible conduct in the chemical sciences.
  11. ​​Before reproducibility ​must come preproducibility​. Nature ​557, 613 (2018). doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-05256-0​
    "Instead of arguing about whether results hold up, let’s push to provide enough information for others to repeat the experiments, says Philip Stark."​
  12. House of Commons, Science and Technology Committee's Sixth Report of Session 2017-2019, Research Integrity.
  13. "Tide of Lies", by Kai Kupferschmidt. Science, Vol 361, Issue 6403, pp. 636-641. doi: 10.1126/science.361.6403.636
  14. "India targets universities in predatory-journal crackdown", by Subhra Priyadarshini. Nature 560, 537-538 (2018). doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-06048-2
  15. Infographics on the responsible conduct of research and handling of research misconduct.
  16. "Thousands of scientists publish a paper every 5 days", by John P.A. Ioannidis, Richard Klavans & Kevin W. Boyack. Nature 561, 167-169 (2018). doi: 10.1038/d41586-018-06185-8
  17. "Predatory conference scammers are getting smarter", by Emma Stoye. 
  18. "Systematic fabrication of scientific images revealed", by Jana Christopher. FEBS Letters, Vol 592, p3027-9 (26 Jul 2018).
  19. "Research on research", by Martin Enserink. Science, Vol 361, Issue 6408, pp. 1178-1179. doi: 10.1126/science.361.6408.1178
  20. "Journals under the microscope", by Jennifer Couzin-Frankel. Science, Vol 361, Issue 6408, pp. 1180-1183. doi: 10.1126/science.361.6408.1180
  21. "The metawars", by Jop de Vrieze. Science, Vol 361, Issue 6408, pp.1184-1188. doi: 10.1126/science.361.6408.1178
  22. "The truth squad", by Erik Stokstad. Science, Vol 361, Issue 6408, pp. 1189-1191. doi: 10.1126/science.361.6408.1189
  23. "A recipe for rigor", by Kai Kupferschmidt. Science, Vol 361, Issue 6408, pp.1192-1193. doi: 10.1126/science.361.6408.1192
  24. "Toward a more scientific science", by Pierre Azoulay et.al. Science, Vol 361, Issue 6408, pp.1194-1197. doi: 10.1126/science.aav2484
  25. Science, Vol 361 (21 September 2018).
  26. "Avoiding Predatory Journals and Questionable Conferences: A Resource Guide (2018)", by Eaton, Sarah Elaine. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/20
  27. "Exploring publication ethics in the arts, humanities, and social sciences: A COPE study 2019"
    https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.4.1
"10 Types of Plagiarism in Research", by Helen Eassom. (2 Feb 2016)

Reproducibility

  1. "Robust research needs many lines of evidence", by Munafo and Smith. Nature, Vol 553:399. (25 Jan 2018)
  2. "Challenge to scientists: does your ten-year-old code still run?", by Jeffrey M. Perkel. Nature, Vol 584: 656-658. (24 Aug 2020)