Regulations for the assurance of good scientific practice
at the Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research (HZI) and
Procedures for the handling of scientific misconduct
Preamble
Scientific work is based on principles that are invariable throughout all disciplines of
science and in all countries. These principles are based on being honest to oneself
and others and are considered to be the foundation of good scientific practice.
On 19 January 1998, the DFG commission for 'Self-monitoring in Science' presented
"Proposals for the assurance of good scientific practice". The proposals require
academic and research institutions to compile binding regulations and to develop
a procedure for the handling of allegations of scientific misconduct. The following
guidelines are based mainly on the statements of the DFG commission and on the
recommendations of the German Rectors Conference ("Hochschulrektorenkonferenz") of July 1998, which, in turn, are based on the resolutions of the senate of
the Max-Planck Society. Terms referring to persons and functions in this text shall
always apply to the male and female version thereof.
1.
Rules of good scientific practice
1.1
Tasks of directors of research groups
The directors of research groups are responsible for establishing an
organisational structure that ensures that the tasks of guidance, supervision,
conflict management and quality assurance are assigned and are actually
implemented. Specifically, they must make sure that students and doctoral
students receive adequate care. For this purpose, there should be a primary
reference person present in the research group, who conveys the basic
principles of good scientific practice at the HZI.
1.2
Scientific publications
1.2.1 Originality and quality always take precedence over quantity as performance
criteria. All authors of scientific publications share the responsibility for
the content of the publication; so-called "honorary authorships" are excluded.
1.2.2 Primary data forming the basis of publications must be archived at the HZI on
stable, secure data media for a period of 10 years. The archiving of other data
must be coordinated with the head of the department/research group, but this
data must be archived for a period of at least 5 years (Appendix 1).
2.
Scientific misconduct
2.1
Definitions
2.1.1 Generally, misconduct is evident if incorrect information is provided intentionally
or grossly negligently to an extent that is significant for the scientific content.
2.1.2 In this context, providing incorrect information includes:
The invention or falsification of data, e.g. through biased selection or rejection
of results without disclosing this act, the manipulation of data, diagrams or
figures as well as the provision of incorrect information in application letters or
grant applications.
2.1.3 In this context, violation of intellectual property shall mean: The unauthorised
exploitation of scientific findings, research approaches or hypotheses, while
falsely claiming authorship (plagiarism), the utilization of the ideas of other
parties, in particular as a reviewer (theft of intellectual property), the
unauthorised disclosure of data to third parties before the publication of such
data as well as the elimination or falsification of primary data.
2.1.4 Misconduct also results from any complicity, co-authorship in falsified
publications and gross neglect of the supervisory duties.
2.2
Contact partner
If there is any pertinent suspicion, contact partners should be available,
including contact partners who are in a senior position, but can act
independently in this regard. For this purpose, a group of ombudsmen (group
of stewards) will be established at the HZI.
3.
Group of ombudsmen
3.1
Election
3.1.1 The work of this group necessitates a high level of trust. Any staff member of
the scientific departments or of the scientific-technical services at the HZI can
be elected to the group of ombudsmen provided the staff member has
completed a course of scientific study. All scientific staff members at the HZI
are eligible to vote. A call asking all individuals eligible to vote to submit their
nominations shall be issued at least three months ahead of the election.
At least five votes are required to be nominated for the election. The list of
proposed persons shall be announced four weeks before the election.
3.1.2 The election will be organised every four years by the Council of Scientists
("Wissenschaftler-Kollegium"). Based on the election result, a group of
ombudsmen consisting of five individuals will be set up and a list of
successors will be established to circumvent vacancies resulting from the
expiration of fixed-term contracts.
3.2
Ombudsperson
3.2.1 The group of ombudsmen selects an ombudsperson as the person of trust
from among their ranks. This person will usually be an experienced scientist
with national and international contacts.
3.2.2 The ombudsperson advises those who approach the ombudsperson with an
issue of the type specified in item 2 and, after completion of a possible
procedure, informs the Executive Management of the HZI. The ombudsperson
checks the allegations, in terms of plausibility, for concreteness and
significance, possible motives and any possibilities of elimination.
3.2.3 To provide for the possibility of partiality, a deputy of the ombudsperson will
be determined from the ranks of the members of the group of ombudsmen.
3.3
Committee/chairperson
If a procedure is to be initiated, the group of ombudsmen assumes
the function of an investigation committee. The group of ombudsmen appoints
one of its members to be chairperson.
4.
Procedure
4.1
Review by ombudsperson
The ombudsperson reviewing the allegations for plausibility and significance is
the primary contact partner for any suspected cases. The review can include
checking back with the individual suspected of misconduct. After checking
back with the informer, the ombudsperson conveys relevant information to the
group of ombudsmen while maintaining strict confidentiality. The group of
ombudsmen then conducts the further procedure as an investigation
committee.
4.2
Procedure before the investigation committee
4.2.1 The ombudsperson takes part in an advising function in the procedure to be
conducted by the investigation committee. The committee is authorised to
undertake, at any time and at own discretion, any and all steps aiding in the
clarification of the facts. For this purpose, the committee can gather all
requisite information and statements and possibly consult members of the
pertinent division. The pertinent individuals are obligated to support the work
of the committee. The consultations are not open to the public. Applying the
principle of freedom of proof, the committee checks whether or not scientific
misconduct is evident.
4.2.2 Preliminary procedure
The person(s) suspected of misconduct is/are advised of the ongoing
procedure and the incriminating facts and/or evidence and is/are given
opportunity to provide a response before the committee within a reasonable
period of time (usually within a period of two weeks). Within two weeks of
receiving the response of the person concerned, the committee takes
a decision regarding possible termination of the preliminary procedure due to
the suspicion not being substantiated sufficiently.
4.2.3 Investigation procedure
If there is probable cause, the preliminary procedure is transitioned into
a formal investigation procedure. In the investigation procedure, suitable
opportunity to provide a response is provided again to the person concerned;
the person concerned can have a person of his or her confidence be present
as counsel at the oral hearing. The name of the informant must be disclosed
no later than in the scope of this procedure.
If the committee considers misconduct as not being sufficiently evidenced,
the committee proposes to close the procedure. If the informant disagrees
with the closing of the procedure, the informant shall be heard again upon
request within a period of two weeks and the committee then has to
reevaluate the decision according to the existing state of the facts. However, if
misconduct appears to have been demonstrated, the committee shall discuss
recommendations concerning the further procedure and possible
consequences for the person concerned as well as proposals for the
safeguarding of the interests of other parties.
If the original suspicion is confirmed, the committee shall prepare a report on
the basis of which the ombudsperson advises the persons who are or were
involved in the case. This advice addresses, in particular, junior scientists and
students who have become entangled in processes of scientific misconduct
without their own fault in order to safeguard their personal and scientific
integrity.
4.2.4 Instruction of the Executive Management of the HZI
The ombudsperson instructs the Executive Management of the HZI of
the outcome of the procedure based on the report of the committee.
The Executive Management decides within a period of four weeks about any
further consequences, which might include returning the procedure to the
committee via the ombudsperson.
4.2.5 Consequences of the procedure
The ultimate consequences for the person concerned may include steps
required under employment or civil service law or under civil or criminal law
to be initiated by the Executive Management of the HZI.
4.3
Confidentiality
During the ongoing procedure, all participating persons are obliged to
maintain strict confidentiality with respect to any information related to
the case. The files of the formal investigation shall be archived
for a period of 30 years. Persons concerned have a right to have
the ombudsperson furnish them with a notice detailing the duration of
the archiving period.
5.
This regulation takes effect on 01 May 2002.
Gesellschaft für Biotechnologische Forschung GmbH
Braunschweig, date
Prof Dr Rudi Balling
Dr Georg Frischmann Scientific
Director
Administrative Director
Renamed:
Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research
Prof Dr Dirk Heinz
Ulf Richter
Scientific Director
Administrative Director
Appendix 1
Recording of scientific data and record-keeping of scientific documents
All steps of experiments and all primary data must be recorded appropriately such
that the results are comprehensible at any time and – if identical experimental
material is available – can be reproduced at any time.
All staff members and guests working in the scientific departments of the HZI will be
furnished with a hardback laboratory journal featuring a table of contents and
consecutive page numbering. All experimental steps/considerations/observations as
well as data, results and working materials that need to be archived externally are to
be recorded in the journal. This type of materials includes vectors, cell lines, new
substances, etc.
The capture, processing and analysis of digital data is to be documented by creating
a central directory in the laboratory journal (name of the data medium, file name,
creation date, cross-references). Digital data are to be backed up at regular intervals
in a form that is protected from overwriting, if possible.
The directors of groups are responsible for the orderly keeping of the laboratory
journals in German or English as well as for the archiving of the working materials by
their staff members. Records and materials shall be available to all staff members of
the research group provided this does not violate obligations to maintain strict
confidentiality. If there is any doubt, the pertinent decision shall be made by the director
of the department or the Executive Management. Both person-related documentation
and project-related documentation are permissible. The reproducibility is ensured
through reference to person-related data.