Ä¢¹½Ö±²¥

According to TENK's Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (RI Guidelines), the basic principles of research integrity are reliability, honesty, respect, and accountability.

• Reliability in ensuring the quality of research, reflected in the design, the methodology, the analysis and the use of resources.
• Honesty in developing, undertaking, reviewing, reporting and communicating research in a transparent, fair, full and unbiased way.
• Respect for colleagues, research participants, society, ecosystems, cultural heritage and the environment.
• Accountability for the research from idea to publication, for its management and organisation, for training, supervision and mentoring, and for its wider impact.

Research integrity consists of good scientific practices. They are described in more detail in (2023)

Violations of RI damage the quality and credibility of research and undermine research collaboration and authorship. (TENK, 2023).

In the Finnish system, violations of research integrity are divided into two categories: research misconduct and disregard for good research practices. Violations can take place at any stage of the research process.

Research misconduct

distorts and falsifies research-based knowledge. It misleads the research community, decision-makers and the general public, decreases the value of research results and outputs, and damages the appreciation of academic research. Furthermore, it causes harm for researchers and research participants. 

• In Finland, research misconduct is categorised into fabrication, falsification and plagiarism in accordance with international practice.

Violation of research integrity 

that do not constitute research misconduct are referred to as disregard for good research practices according to the established practice in Finland.

Examples of disregard include:

• failure to request or comply with relevant permits or statements,
• inadequate documentation and storage of research results and data,
• inappropriate delaying and hampering the work of other researchers,
• inadequate or inappropriate references to previous results,
• denigrating or deliberately neglecting to mention other researchers’ contributions,
• manipulating authorship by other means,
• failure to declare significant conflicts of interest,
• inappropriate use of seniority and influence, self-plagiarism, and
• misleading the research community, research funders or the general public over one’s research. 

Alleged violations of research integrity are investigated under the direction of the Rector in accordance with a process defined by the TENK. According to TENK guidelines, the Rector cannot delegate the management of the investigation process to another person.

This means that allegations are not dealt with by internal processes within the faculty or other unit but are brought to the attention of the Rector by written notification. 

Suspected violations concerning undergraduate theses, as well as licentiate theses, will not be handled in accordance with the TENK's RI Guidelines, but in accordance with the University's own Ethical guidelines for studying and the processing of academic fraud at the Ä¢¹½Ö±²¥. The updated guidelines came into force in June. The principles of research integrity and good research practices continue to apply to undergraduate theses.

The procedure

The JYU handles alleged violations of the research integrity (RI) according to  

1.  A notification to the Rector

The allegation of a violation of the RI  must be communicated in writing to the rector via the Registers Office of JYU using the  
In submitting a notification of an alleged RI violation, the following must be observed:

• The notification is submitted to the organisation where the alleged violation has taken or is taking place or where the person suspected of RI violation works or has worked during the events in question.
• The notification can be submitted only if the organisation in question has committed to the RI guidelines.
• The notification must be sent to the director of the organisation.
• The person submitting the notification does not have to be a researcher or member of the research community.
• The notification is submitted under one’s own name. In problematic situations, the complainant can contact TENK’s Secretary General in advance.
• The complainant must specify in writing any connections they have to the case or the person(s) suspected of violation.
  Submitting a malicious notification may in itself be an RI violation.

The notification cannot be made anonymously. Therefore, the notification cannot be made through the university's whistleblowing reporting channel, but in your own name, using the TENK notification form (link above). 

All documents sent to the authorities or produced by them are generally public in accordance with The Act on Openness of Government Activities (621/1999).

2. A notification is not submitted to the Rector of the University when:

• The research in question has been carried out or is being carried out in another organisation than JYU.
• It is a question of sincere differences of opinion that result from the interpretations and assessments of research result

It is not a matter of research ethics, but of e.g. legal issues or workplace problems

If you are not sure if it is a question of a violation of responsible conduct of research, please contact the JYU research integrity support: research-integrity@jyu.fi

3. NOTE!

According to TENK, submitting a malicious notification may in itself be an RI violation.
The rector will decide on the potential consequences should the allegations regarding the violation of the RI be unfounded or malicious.

The University has two research integrity advisers who give confidential, low-threshold counselling in issues related to the responsible conduct of research. With a research integrity adviser, you can discuss if you are dealing with a research ethical problem or something else. For example, according to the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity (TENK) guidelines, sincere differences of opinion that result from the interpretations and assessments of research results belong to academic and scientific debate and do not violate the responsible conduct of research.

When suspecting a research misconduct, the research integrity advisers guide you in the RI process and instruct when to turn to the Rector.

The role of advisers:

• Research integrity advisers do not participate in the processing of allegations.
• Research integrity advisers do not take a position on whether or not an offence has been committed.
• On the other hand, persons preparing for the Rector's decisions in the RI process may not give advice on RI matters.

Email: research-integrity@jyu.fi

• Senior Lecturer Juha Merikoski, The Faculty of Mathematics and Science
• Senior Lecturer Mikko Simula, The Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences