Nick is Professor Emeritus of History, University of Michigan, Research Integrity Consultant and Co-founder of the World Conferences on Research Integrity.
When Epigeum first inquired about updating the Research Integrity course, my initial thought was that it would be a piece of cake. After all, how much within the research climate could have changed over the four years since the course was last updated? However, this thought quickly gave way to the realization that there have been significant changes, and therefore updates were needed.
The most important and encouraging change is the strengthening of the UK’s National commitment to research integrity. The recently formed (2022) UK Committee on Research Integrity (CORI) has an ambitious list of objectives that it is working hard to achieve. One of its many projects is collecting information about research culture and environment, which is welcome news for anyone who is concerned about the apparent increase in irresponsible practices in research.
Anyone who is involved in promoting the responsible conduct of research knows that culture and environment both influence researchers behaviours. Unreasonable demands and unrealistic standards can undermine the guidance provided in online courses or in the classroom. I have often heard students say: “yes, I know what I ought to do but you don’t understand what I have to do to keep my job and advance.” Thus, I am acutely aware of what some researchers feel they have to do to succeed, which means that anything UK CORI can do to address cultural and environmental issues will make the job easier for mentors and teachers providing guidance on the responsible conduct of research. Indeed One of the most important updates in the new version of Epigeum’s Research Integrity course are links to UK CORI’s new and planned guidance on research integrity.
Positive changes such as UK CORI’s planned guidance have been offset by a host of new challenges in the research sector, such as the responsible use of AI in research. We have included much needed content on this in the new updates to Research Integrity. Since researchers and governments are just beginning to provide guidance on the responsible use of AI in research, providing specific advice was a challenge. For now, we have highlighted some of the challenges AI poses, starting with a new activity based on AI’s response to a prompt asking for advice on the responsible use of AI in research. (As a preview, the popular AI programme I used provided acceptable basic text, but its suggested notes were not accurate, and also did not disclose its conflict of interest.) The new AI section in the course further offers some simple guidance: disclose any use of AI, explain what you did, and don’t list AI as an author on your publications. As more specific guidance or regulations emerge, you can look forward to further course updates.
Updating the ways research publication has changed over the last few years and including this in the course updates has also been a challenge, starting with Open Access publication. The old, professionally run 20th century publication system tightly controlled what was published, perhaps too tightly in some instances. However, it had one significant flaw; research findings were not readily available to the public, which increasingly paid for the research that was published. Open Access publication seemed like the obvious solution to this problem, but the new approach was perhaps adopted too quickly without thinking through some of the problems it raised, such as who would pay for or profit from publication fees. It did not take long for unscrupulous players to find ways to profit from open access publication by compromising peer review, hijacking legitimate journals and selling authorship. These changes have required adding more cautions to the updated version to help researchers avoid getting into similar problems.
In addition to finding a responsible way to provide open access to their research findings, researchers must now choose between these different publication options:
1) register your research before conducting any research
2) share your progress at meetings and conferences before submitting a formal paper
3) use websites such as medRxiv or Social Science One to publish your research before it is peer reviewed
4) publish in a low-impact-factor journal that guarantees quick peer review and publication
5) wait for a respected journal in your field of research to carefully review but then publish a full report of your findings
6) find a high-impact-factor journal that is willing to publish a summary of your findings but not a complete report?
The new version of the UK RI course has more to say about these options but providing advice on which one to choose or how to decide is not easy. This is why some of the many activities in the course and end of module case studies end with: “seek advice from a trusted mentor or university official.”
Getting good advice, of course, depends on well-trained mentors and university officials. My goals as the primary course author are to engage learners, inform them about responsible research practices, point out some of the ways their integrity will be tested and provide them with advice on how to avoid problems before they become dilemmas. It is now up to research institutions to assure that they have a culture and environment that will reinforce the lessons in the updated UK Research Integrity course.
The updated Research Integrity UK course is available now, with an ANZ regional version launching later this year, and a US one publishing in 2025. To find out more and to request a free trial, visit our course page below.
