17勛圖厙

Participate in a Study Research Systems

Violations of Research Integrity

Research Misconduct

What is Research Misconduct: 

Research misconduct is fabrication, falsification or plagiarism in proposing, performing or reviewing research; submitting proposals for research; or in reporting research results knowingly, intentionally and/or recklessly and does not include honest error or differences of opinion. 

  • Fabrication is making up data or results and recording or reporting them. 

  • Falsification is manipulating research materials, equipment or processes; or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the research record. 

  • Plagiarism is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results or words without giving appropriate credit. 

Anyone reporting an allegation may initially pose a hypothetical scenario, while not revealing any specific details. This is important in cases where the reporter may not be certain that the allegations meet the definition of research misconduct. 

Not all breaches of research integrity equate research misconduct. For example, manuscript authorship disputes rarely meet the definition of research misconduct (see below under OTHER VIOLATIONS OF RESEARCH INTEGRITY). 

Report Research Misconduct

Questions and concerns related to research misconduct can be reported and/or specific allegations can be made confidentially by using one of the following methods: 

  2. Email the Research Integrity Officer (RIO) - Babatunde Kay Oyajobi 

  3. Use the  

Allegation(s) received by any other administrative units at the institution should be referred in the first instance to the RIO.

All allegations of research misconduct reported anonymously must be specific enough to enable appropriate investigation. 

All research misconduct allegations are handled according to institutional handbook of operating policies (IHOP) 7.6.1 unless where it defers to another policy in the IHOP. 

Per IHOP 7.6.1, to the extent possible, rights of respondent(s) and reporter(s) (if identified) will be safeguarded and confidentiality will be maintained until the research misconduct proceeding is complete.  

Institutional policy and 17勛圖厙 law prohibits and protects anyone reporting misconduct or participating in misconduct proceedings from retaliation. Procedures for handling retaliation are detailed in IHOP . 

Purpose of the Research Misconduct Proceedings 

To formally: 

  • develop a factual record of allegation(s) through the collection and thorough examination of all relevant evidence

  • evaluate the resulting record to determine whether research misconduct occurred 

  • identify the person(s) responsible for the specified research misconduct 

Steps in the Research Misconduct Proceeding: 

  1. Allegation(s) received by RIO 

  2. An initial (preliminary) assessment to determine if allegation(s) meet the definition of research misconduct. If yes, proceed to next step. 

  3. An inquiry to determine if a full research misconduct investigation is warranted. If yes, proceed to next step. If no, the research misconduct proceeding ends.  

  4. An investigation occurs to examine all available evidence followed by identification and substantiation of any specific instances of misconduct and person(s) responsible. 

  5. Final determination and report of outcome of investigation to institutional leadership and funding entities, as appropriate. 

This is a visual representation of the Steps in Research Misconduct Proceedings to provide visual flowchart, but the information is the same as the text accompaniment in the previous section.
Click to view enlarged flowchart image.

Other Violations of Research Integrity (Questionable Research Practices)

These are practices that distort the research record and/or damage the integrity of researchers and/or the research process: 

  • Directing or encouraging others to engage in research misconduct. 

  • Failure to report or cover up of observed research misconduct, evidence of research misconduct or other putative breaches of research integrity. 

  • Retaliation against a whistleblower (for reporting research misconduct) or for participating in misconduct proceedings. 

  • Dishonesty in publications (e.g., gift authorship, self-plagiarism, salami publishing, misrepresentation, hiding the use of AI in the creation of content or drafting of grant proposals and publications). 

  • Unethical peer-review (including failure to maintain confidentiality in review of grant proposals, manuscripts, etc.). 

  • Delaying or inappropriately hampering the work and/or tampering with research-related materials of other researchers. 

  • Malicious accusation of another researcher of research misconduct or other violations of research integrity.

These violations should also be reported to the RIO. Depending on the violation and the governing policy per the , the RIO will either investigate or direct the complaint to the appropriate institutional unit for further investigation.