Page 33

Code-of-Conduct-final

DTU Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity iv. Institutions should have a policy which describes their system for addressing suspicions of breaches of responsible conduct of research, including: a. Where and to whom a person can turn to for advice on a well-founded suspicion of a breach of responsible conduct of research b. The step-by-step procedure for addressing such suspicions c. The possible outcomes of an investigation d. The sanctions that may be imposed at the institutional level e. Dealing with suspicions that involve research or staff from other institu-tions, including institutions abroad f. Other relevant information THE DANISH COMMITTEES ON SCIENTIFIC DISHONESTY The Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD) form a central national body tasked with handling allegations on research misconduct based on complaints brought be-fore the committees by individuals or institutions. The DCSD is an independent body es-tablished by an Act of Parliament under the Ministry of Higher Education and Science. The DCSD’s mandate is limited to allegations concerning research misconduct (referred to as ‘scientific dishonesty’ in the Act) as defined in Consolidated Act no. 365 of 10 April 2014 on the research advisory system, etc., section 2 (3): “The term ‘scientific dishonesty is defined as: falsification, fabrication, plagiarism and other serious violations of good scientific practice committed intentionally or due to gross negli-gence during the planning, implementation or reporting of research results.” Thus, the DCSD cannot deal with cases solely concerning breaches of responsible con-duct of research, if such breaches do not represent research misconduct as described above. More information on the mandate and structure of the DCSD is available at www.ufm.dk/uvvu DTU – Technical University of Denmark 33


Code-of-Conduct-final
To see the actual publication please follow the link above