Terminology

*For reference, only*

Within this course, the ambition is to use the terms as follows. While there is no formal nomenclature within research ethics, there are surely exceptions. Bolded terms are more closely associated to legal regulation and thus less flexible.

 

‘Research ethics’ is used as an umbrella term for the reflecting, analytical and systematical way to approach the management of risks of harm or violations of people or the environment, or corruptions of the academic activities or related record.

‘Good research practice’ is used to describe the successful integration of scientific or scholarly requirements with research ethics into actually working routines, protocols and praxis.

‘Researcher’s integrity’ refers to the character trait demonstrated by the ability to uphold good research practice even when facing conflicting interests. Such interests may or may not arise from colleagues, the university management, funders, cooperating partners or publishers.

‘Research misconduct’ is serious violations against good research practice. Misconduct is traditionally defined to be fabrication, falsification or plagiarism (FFP), which are special cases of lying, deceiving and stealing, respectively.

‘Questionable research practices’ (QRPs) are various activities that tend to be violations against good research practice in a wide sense, but are not always violations. Violations may include misrepresenting authorship, misusing seniority, supporting predatory journals, cherry picking, p-hacking, self-plagiarism etcetera.

'Institutional review' or ‘Ethics review’ refers to a strictly legally regulated administrative procedure to assess research projects that fulfill at least one of several criteria defined by law. The procedure may or may not result in an ethics approval.

‘Ethics assessment’ refers to a procedure that is offered as a service by the national agency Ethics Review Authority as well as the KTH Ethics Committee. It may also refer to the continuous reflection and work on research ethics by the researcher and research group.

‘Dual-use' refers to the fact that things, software or sets of information that usually have civil uses also may be used for military purposes (including weapons of mass destruction).

'Misuse' refers to the risk that things, software or sets of information that is used or generated within research also may be used for nefarious purposes such as terrorism or oppression.