Censurable and unethical research conditions

What should be reported? 

Possible violations of recognised research ethics standards or subject-specific norms and guidelines for good scientific practice, and which are based on research activities at INN. If you as a INN University employee discover possible unethical research rooted in other institutions, the whistleblower report will be addressed there.  Censurable and unethical research conditions can be divided into two main categories: 

Scientific misconduct: Deliberate malpractice; falsification, fabrication and plagiarism (FFP) and other serious violations of recognised research ethics norms that have been committed intentionally or through gross negligence in the planning, implementation or reporting of research, see Section 8 of the Norwegian Act on Ethics and Integrity in Research.
 
Questionable research practice - QRP: Less deliberate, less serious and can be difficult to detect, is easily influenced by values and expectations, and disagreements and doubts that arise must as far as possible be clarified locally. 

What should not be reported? 

Professional and academic disagreements, working environment conflicts, contractual disputes, matters that are believed to be censurable based on one’s own political or moral convictions, or similar. This may be perceived as problematic research ethics practice without actually being so. 

Clarification

Clarification or possible solutions should first be attempted locally: 

• If possible, discuss the problem with the person in question. 
• If possible, seek advice from colleagues, the academic community or others you trust.
• If possible, discuss the matter with your immediate manager or research group leader and/or
• Seek advice from one of the The National Research Ethics Committees > Committees and commission,  to discuss the matter on a general basis ('NN') Choice of whistleblower

Choice of whistleblower authority

If it is not possible to solve the matter locally or if the severity of the case so dictates, under Section 2 A-2 of the Norwegian Working Environment Act it is possible to: 

• Report the matter via this whistleblower scheme - ‘Speak up’ (see links below)
• Report the matter to the public supervisory authority relevant for the topic:  To the Norwegian Board of Health Supervision for cases concerning medical and health research, or to the Norwegian Data Protection Authority for cases concerning the misuse of personal data, or to the Norwegian Food Safety Authority for research on animals. The list is not exhaustive. 
• Report externally to the media or the general public if one is in genuine good faith regarding the content of the reported conditions, the reporting relates to censurable conditions that are of public interest and/or that one has first reported internally, or has reason to believe that internal reporting would not be appropriate.

Whistleblower form for employees and students;Whistleblower form for externals;Whistleblower form anonymous

Principles for the processing of reported cases 

• All enquiries/reports must be taken seriously.
• All enquiries/reports must be processed without undue delay
• The choice of reporting method should not affect how the enquiry/report is handled.
•  All reported cases must be dealt with confidentially.
• The identity of the whistleblower must not be made known to more people than is absolutely necessary for the further processing of the reported case. 
• Whistleblowing should take place without fear of consequences, the employer must ensure that the whistleblower has a fully satisfactory working environment and, if necessary, implement measures to prevent retaliation. This also applies to students and others who file whistleblower reports (Section 2A-3 of the Norwegian Working Environment Act, Prohibition against retaliation).  A more detailed description of whistleblower protection can be found in the attached guidelines. 

Possible outcomes

• The Pro-rector of Research determines when the enquiry/report is sufficiently discussed and closes the case with a conclusion. 
• Mediation where relevant.
• Forwarding the case to the Research Integrity Committee if there is a reasonable suspicion of possible scientific misconduct. 

Here you will find detailed information about the distribution of responsibilities and tasks, administrative procedures, protection of the whistleblower and protection of the person to whom the reporting relates.

Guidelines for processing of cases of possible violations of research ethics  standards at Inland Norway University College of Applied Sciences and University of South-Eastern Norway

Research Integrity Committee - the Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences and the University of South-Eastern Norway have a joint Research Integrity Committee.