|
|
|
|
|
|
D/2.7 Procedures for dealing with allegations of research misconduct |
||||||||||||||||
2.7.1 Application 2.7.1 ApplicationThe following procedures provide an institutional framework for dealing with allegations of research misconduct and establish a fair and equitable process for determining whether research misconduct has occurred. QUT’s process for dealing with allegations of research misconduct is consistent with the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research. 2.7.2 Definition of research misconductResearch misconduct is constituted by a failure to comply with the specific provisions of the QUT Code of Conduct for Research and the broader Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research. Research misconduct includes, but is not limited to,
Research misconduct does not include honest errors or honest differences in interpretations or judgements of data. Examples of research misconduct include, but are not limited to, the following: (a) Misappropriation A researcher or reviewer shall not intentionally or recklessly
(b) Interference A researcher or reviewer shall not intentionally and without authorisation take or sequester or materially damage any research-related property of another, including without limitation the apparatus, reagents, biological materials, writings, data, hardware, software, or any other substance or device used or produced in the conduct of research. If warranted by the extent of substantial damage to property, cases may also be referred and dealt with in accordance with procedures outlined in the QUT Code of Conduct (for staff) and QUT Statute No 2 (Student Discipline) (for students), in addition to these procedures. (c) Misrepresentation A researcher or reviewer shall not, with intent to deceive or in reckless disregard for the truth,
2.7.3 Advisors on integrity in research(a) The Faculty Research Ethics Advisor ( see D/6.1.4 ) in each faculty will act as adviser to staff and students on issues of integrity in research / research misconduct. It is expected that Faculty Research Ethics Advisors will be familiar with:
In the course of providing advice, the Faculty Research Ethics Advisor may recommend one of the following options:
(b) Where staff or students, in seeking advice from the Faculty Research Ethics Advisor, recognise a potential or actual conflict of interest either on personal or professional grounds, the staff member or student must advise the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation). (c) The Faculty Research Ethics Advisor will advise staff and students about what constitutes misconduct in research and issues of integrity in research, and explain the rights and responsibilities of individuals in relation to any complaints. (d) The Faculty Research Ethics Advisor's role does not extend to the investigation or assessment of the allegation. 2.7.4 Receipt of complaintsAllegation of research misconduct - Preliminary Review (a) A complaint of suspected or alleged misconduct in research by a QUT-related research worker, including QUT staff and postgraduate students, whether or not it has occurred within the University, is to be made as soon as practicable in the first instance to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation), as the Designated Person under the QUT Code of Conduct for Research ( D/2.6 ). (b) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) should be provided with all available information relevant to the complaint, by the complainant. Where appropriate, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) may seek advice from the Chair of the relevant ethics committee regarding the validity of the allegation. (c) Upon receipt of the allegation of research misconduct, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) must immediately provide the person/s against whom the allegation is made, with a written statement of any allegations. (d) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) will seek a written response from the person/s against whom the allegations have been made within 10 working days of notification to that person of the allegations. This response will be considered to determine whether a case exists that research misconduct may have occurred. (e) In the case of allegations of staff research misconduct, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) may decide to initiate an internal institutional research misconduct inquiry by appointing appropriate members, including at least one member with experience and knowledge in the relevant field or research and at least one member who is familiar with the responsible conduct of research. At least one member should have experience on similar panels or have relevant experience or expertise. The role of the panel is to investigate the case and to ensure the fair dealing and protection of all interested parties during the review. Such fair dealing must consider the protection of persons making allegations in good faith, and of persons accused of misconduct. (f) In the case of allegations of student research misconduct, the matter may be referred to the Student Research Misconduct Committee and/or to the Registrar to be dealt with under QUT Statute No 2 (Student Discipline) in cases relating to property damage. The role of the Committee is to investigate the case and to ensure the fair dealing and protection of all interested parties during the review. Such fair dealing must consider the protection of persons making allegations in good faith, and of persons accused of misconduct. (g) Without limiting the generality of the following, interested parties may include:
(h) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) will advise the Vice-Chancellor on the outcomes of any inquiry process and will provide a recommendation on further action to be taken as appropriate. 2.7.5 Formal investigation of complaints - staff(a) If the preliminary review by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) finds that a sufficient case exists, a formal investigation in relation to misconduct, serious misconduct or unsatisfactory performance will be established. (b) The procedures to be followed are contained in the following:
(c) If research misconduct is found to have occurred, the findings must be reported to:
(d) Where a person accused of research misconduct resigns from the University, a formal investigation to establish the facts of the matter in which research misconduct is alleged to have occurred will be undertaken or continued. Distortions of the research record must be rectified, whether or not the persons involved remain in the institution. (e) If, after formal investigation, no case is found to exist, the research worker concerned shall be informed in writing that no further action will be taken. 2.7.6 Formal investigation of complaints - students(a) These procedures recognise that the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) is generally best placed to form judgement on the seriousness of an instance of student research misconduct. (b) Allegations of student research misconduct will be dealt with by a Student Research Misconduct Committee, constituted as required by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation). The Committee is comprised of:
(c) The Chair of the Student Research Misconduct Committee will, within 10 working days of establishing that there is a potential case of research misconduct, formally notify the student in writing of the allegation of research misconduct in a "show cause" notice. The "show cause" notice must:
(d) The student may elect to both attend an interview and provide a written response. The student may obtain a copy of any report relating to the allegation, upon making request to the Chair. A student who attends an interview may be accompanied by another person (the Postgraduate Students Association is generally able to provide this support to students upon request). This person must not be legally qualified and has no rights of advocacy on behalf of the student. (e) The time set for the interview and for a written response must be no less than 10 working days, and no more than 15 working days, from the date of the notice. In exceptional circumstances only, the Chair may consider a request from the student for an extension of time to provide a written response or attend an interview. (f) Following receipt of any further information from the student, the Student Research Misconduct Committee will consider all the evidence and determine whether the allegation has been proved to the reasonable satisfaction of the Committee (by simple majority). If the student does not provide any written response to the "show cause" notice or attend an interview, the Committee may determine whether the allegation has been proved, again to the Committee's reasonable satisfaction, without further recourse to the student. The Committee's determination should normally be made within one month of the issuing of the “show cause” notice. (g) Where the Student Research Misconduct Committee makes a finding that the allegation has been proved, the Committee must provide a report to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation). The report will include the justification for the findings of the Student Research Misconduct Committee, a record of interview and/or the student's written response. The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) recommends the penalty to be applied having regard to penalties applied in similar cases previously, the seriousness of the breach of research conduct having regard to the circumstances, and any previous proven acts of research misconduct on the part of the student. (h) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) may reprimand the student and/or recommend to the Registrar one or more of following penalties in accordance with Student Rule 29(4):
(i) The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) will formally advise the student in writing of the findings and of the penalty to be imposed by the Registrar. The decision must be communicated to the student within seven days of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation)'s determination. (j) Action arising from the imposition of a penalty will be referred to the Registrar, the Student Business Services Department, the Research Students Centre and/or officers of the faculty or school (including the supervisor) as appropriate. The Human Resources Department will hold records of all cases of staff research misconduct for the reference of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) as required. The Research Students Centre will hold records of all cases of student research misconduct for the reference of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) as required. 2.7.7 Student appeals(a) A student upon whom a penalty has been imposed by the Registrar may appeal to the Appeals Committee of University Academic Board. The student must appeal within 10 working days of the date of the letter to the student advising of the findings and penalty imposed for research misconduct (b) Where Appeals Committee determines that the procedures set out in this policy have not been followed, the matter will be remitted to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) for a new determination or imposition of a new penalty. The Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Commercialisation) will not hold a fresh hearing into the matter. (c) The secretary to Appeals Committee will advise the student, and relevant officers of the University as appropriate, of the outcome of the appeal. Related DocumentsMOPP B/8.1 Code of Conduct MOPP D/2.6 QUT Code of Conduct for Research MOPP D/5.4 Code of Good Practice for Postgraduate Research Studies and Supervision at QUT Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research Statement on Consumer and Community Participation in Health and Medical Research (NHMRC and Consumers' Health Forum of Australia Inc, 2002) Values and Ethics - Guidelines for Ethical Conduct in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Research (NHMRC, 2003) Modification History
|
