This document provides a general perspec-tive on research integrity, which must be operationalized at each research institution to reflect its own practices, needs, and context. The ORI must be an integral and permanent unit within the research infra-structure of the institution, where it plays a dual role of coach and enforcer. As a coach, the ORI encourages and enables a culture of research integrity and provides training. As
enforcer, it monitors research activity for potential malfeasance and acts swiftly, with fairness and tact, when it notices or has instances of research misconduct brought to its attention.
There are resources, governance structures, models, and guidance available for establish-ing an ORI. Examples of such resources are included in Appendix 1.
4.1 Office of Research Integrity
As mentioned, research has always been a competitive endeavour, but this competition is now global and fast-paced. As competition for prestige and funding has grown, there is evidence that the incidence of research misconduct has also grown (Fanelli, 2009).
To cultivate and sustain a culture of research integrity, the ORI must:
4 Build upon the principles listed in this document by developing its own Code of Conduct for its context in alignment with
4Keep abreast of current good practices for promoting the proper management and conduct of research.
4 Deploy a research management and monitoring system to keep track of grant proposals, research projects, publications, and other research products.
4 Ensure that the research incentives are designed to reward research integrity. For example, incentives that reward high quality research over quantity (Finkel, 2019).
4.2 Governance
4 Develop a checklist and training progra- mmes for researchers to familiarize them with research integrity, potential pitfalls, and how to avoid and address them.
4 Build checks to minimize conflicts of interest among reviewers.
Each ORI would also have to develop its own guidelines regarding processes and proce-dures for dealing with allegations of research misconduct. In this context, its role would be to:
4 Provide clarity regarding procedures for addressing allegations of misconduct, for example:
4 Whose responsibility is it to report misconduct?
What is the policy on whistleblowing?
Who should receive the complaint?
4 Who will conduct the investigation? Will the investigation be confined to the ORI, handed off to external reviewers, or to another part of the research institution?
4 Who has the authority to implement the penalties?
Define what is fair and timely adjudication 4Keep records and document the source of
the allegation, how the allegation was addressed, the outcome of the investigation, and the penalties meted out, if any.
Investigations must be timely and be con-ducted sensitively (Welpe, et al., 2015).
The research community has responded to growing concern regarding research integ-rity by holding conferences (World Confe- rence on Research Integrity, 2020), offering training, (SRA International, 2020) establish-ing policies, and issuestablish-ing codes of conduct (All European Academies, 2017) and protocols (World Conference on Research Integrity, 2010).
Education and training are important aspects of developing a culture so that research integrity becomes a “way of life”, a habit. Not only should researchers be aware of what research integrity means, but they must also have the skills to put that awareness into practice.
The ORI can play an important role in devel-oping and delivering the training (Emerson,
2017). Support for such training from the senior leadership of the university or research organization as well as one’s immediate supervisor is an important factor in ensuring that the training is undertaken and the likeli-hood of it being a success (Vanderbilt University, 2020). The ORI should ensure development of checklists and other training materials and delivery of that training on a regular basis. To enforce awareness and adoption, the ORI can consider making the training programmes on research integrity mandatory for all researchers and students (Finkel, 2019). In addition, such programmes should lead to a certification based on the successful completion of a rigorous course of study. The certification could also be made a prerequisite for receiving research funding or promotions.
4.3 Training
4 4
4
In addition to a general introduction to research integrity and misconduct, the train-ing should also focus on the different stages of the research cycle and on specific forms of misconduct at each stage, as already dis-cussed.
To familiarize researchers with the diversity of the research enterprise, the ORI can offer training on topics such as informed consent, communication (with funders, research collaborators, students, or journal editors), and other topics that are context-specific or pertinent for specific disciplines.
A conflict of interest (COI) arises when a researcher can derive personal gain while acting in an official capacity. Conflict of interest has been defined as: “… a situation in which financial or other personal considerations have the potential to compromise or bias profes-sional judgement and objectivity. An appar-ent conflict of interest is one in which a reasonable person would think that the professional’s judgement is likely to be compromised. It is important to note that a conflict of interest exists whether or not decisions are affected by a personal interest;
a conflict of interest implies only the poten-tial for bias, not a likelihood” (Conflict of Interest, 2020).
In research, conflicts can arise in subtle and not so subtle ways. Conflicts often arise when
a researcher is called upon to review a grant proposal or a research paper. A researcher is usually asked to serve as a reviewer when a paper or grant proposal is aligned with that researcher’s expertise. An obvious conflict could arise if the researcher realizes that the paper under review is similar to his or her research, and there may be some benefits in delaying the potential publication of that paper to gain more time to complete the personal research or to expedite it because it might shed favourable light on a product that he or she might be attempting to bring to the market. More subtle forms of conflict might arise from personal biases regarding the use of a particular research method or data source or the way in which the research is framed and approached.
4.4 Conflict of Interest
To avoid potential conflict of interest:
4Declare any real or perceived financial or professional conflict of interest
4Be aware of and abide by the organizational regulations and guidelines regarding the management of potential conflicts of interest
4Constitute and follow a policy of complete disclosure especially with respect to the financial conflicts
4Focus on the scientific merits when conducting a grant or manuscript evaluation
4Undergo training to uncover personal conscious and unconscious biases and exercise