Good Scientific Practice Helga Nolte Hamburg Gerlinde Sponholz

Good Scientific Practice Helga Nolte, Hamburg, Gerlinde Sponholz, Berlin Estonian Research Council – September 17 th/18 th, 2015 – Tartu and Tallinn

Preventive measures in all university guidelines • • • Educating young researches Fostering awareness Role model of experienced researchers Responsible Mentoring Organizational measures to foster GSP Open and transparent systems of decision making Estonian Research Council – September 17 th/18 th, 2015 – Tartu and Tallinn

N. Steneck (2009): Introduction to the responsible Conduct of Research. DIANE Publishing , Darby PA Estonian Research Council – September 17 th/18 th, 2015 – Tartu and Tallinn

Fanelli D (2009) How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data. PLos ONE 4(5): e 5738. doi: 10. 1371/journal. pone. 0005738 21 Studies included Fabrication, falsification or alteration of results admitted, 2 % ( 1 % - 4 %) directly observed, 14 % (9 % - 20 %) Questionable research practices admitted, 10 % (5 % - 34 %) directly observed, 29 % (6 % -72 %) Estonian Research Council – September 17 th/18 th, 2015 – Tartu and Tallinn

Experience with Misconduct Gommel et al (2015) Teaching Good Scientific Practice: Results from a Survey and Observations from Two Hundred Courses. JUNQ 5/2: 11 -16 Estonian Research Council – September 17 th/18 th, 2015 – Tartu and Tallinn

Curriculum for Teaching Good Scientific Practice October 2009: first German version October 2011: English Version Curriculum “Good Scientific Practice” for Courses in Science and Medicine October 2012: revision and extension http: //www. ombudsman-fuer-diewissenschaft. de Estonian Research Council – September 17 th/18 th, 2015 – Tartu and Tallinn

GSP-Courses since 2009 For students, doctoral and junior scientists/ Ph. D-students workshop short workshop 2009 2 1 2010 5 3 1 2011 16 3 2012 41 12 2013 48 4 12 2014 63 5 14 2015 (01 -08) 25 2 intro- lecture Estonian Research Council – September 17 th/18 th, 2015 – Tartu and Tallinn

Contents of GSP Workshops Process of Research Good Scientific Practice Scientific Misconduct Local, national international rules, codes - data management - publication process - authorship - mentoring - cooperation - conflict of interest - (research with human subjects and animals) Dealing with conflicts; ombudssystem; potential consequences Estonian Research Council – September 17 th/18 th, 2015 – Tartu and Tallinn

GSP Teachers‘ Training 2013 2014 2015 planned 2016 planned 3 1 2 7 Different extent and intensity Different requests and target groups Estonian Research Council – September 17 th/18 th, 2015 – Tartu and Tallinn

Teachers’ Training „Good Scientific Practice“ Goals The participants learn to develop and conduct workshops on good scientific practice. The participants will - acquire specific knowledge on good scientific practice - acquire specific knowledge on questionable practice and on scientific misconduct, and learn how to deal adequately with both - develop their teaching concepts - train their teaching skills - reflect their role as researchers, supervisors and mentors Estonian Research Council – September 17 th/18 th, 2015 – Tartu and Tallinn

Teachers’ Training „Good Scientific Practice“ Content • GSP: historical background; local, national and international guidelines, rules and recommendations • Scientific misconduct: causes, definitions, types, frequency and paradigmatic cases • Data management: generation, documentation, storage, ownership and safeguarding • Authorship and the process of publishing • Supervision and mentoring • Conflicts of interest and scientific cooperation • Dealing with conflicts and scientific misconduct: ombudspersons, whistleblowing, investigative commissions, procedures and consequences • National and international resources on “good scientific practice” • Teaching concepts: methodology, structure, case discussion, team teaching, evaluation Estonian Research Council – September 17 th/18 th, 2015 – Tartu and Tallinn

Problems of implementation • • • Additional teaching load Compensation for additional work (money, time. . ) Teaching task voluntary or obligatory Voluntary vs. mandatory participation of students “Lone fighter” or network Missing overview about the real demand / need • Discomfort in view of too much insider knowledge ! Estonian Research Council – September 17 th/18 th, 2015 – Tartu and Tallinn