UKRI Research Integrity Workshop

Efforts to improve research culture, in particular to raise the profile of research integrity and make it safer for people to raise concerns about it, may increase the frequency with which such concerns are raised. There is anecdotal evidence that this may be starting to happen. Research organisations, funders and publishers have various responsibilities when they become aware of allegations / cases of intentional research misconduct. If more concerns and allegations are raised, then organisations such as these may need to be better prepared to manage this increase. One aspect of this is ensuring that information is shared appropriately; improvements here could help organisations better discharge their responsibilities and perhaps reduce burden / bureaucracy.

UKRI will work with partners to convene three fact-finding workshops to identify current practice, and perceived challenges and risks in information sharing. Participants in the three workshops will be those with operational responsibilities for research integrity. One workshop will convene publishers, one research organisations, and one research funders.

UKRI and ARMA are collaborating to host the workshop with research organisations. Participants should be those able to share experience / examples of sharing information between research organisations, funders and/or publishers about concerns, allegations and/or cases of potential research misconduct. The workshop will include participants in different roles, from a range of types of research organisation across the UK.

The scope:
1. Information about allegations / cases of intentional research misconduct may also bring in issues of, eg, research security, or bullying and harassment. The workshop will focus on information and responsibilities bearing specifically on research misconduct policies and procedures.
2. Information may also relate to potential research misconduct overseas, where the research was in collaboration with or funded by a UK body, or involved a UK-based researcher or author in some way; such situations are in scope.
3. Some new developments, such as paper mills, are challenging existing protocols and expectations for information sharing between stakeholders, and are in scope.

Outputs and benefits:
This is a fact-finding exercise, to surface existing practice, trends and challenges. UKRI will write up each workshop (under the Chatham House Rule) for the benefit of the participants of each, and will draft a synthesis report of all three workshops that will be published.

The output will provide evidence on which stakeholders may consider any next steps, for example toward a more structured investigation of potential interventions that might include clearer information sharing protocols and guidance, better use of mechanisms to share learning from difficult cases, and/or training and support for staff with relevant responsibilities.