TENK's statement summaries

Last updated 7.6.2024

On this page you can search summaries of statements issued by the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity TENK concerning allegations of violations of research integrity (RI).

Allegations of RI violations are always investigated within the organisation in which the suspected violation occurred or where the person against whom the allegation is made was working when it occurred. Once the allegation has first been addressed under the organisation’s RI process, the party dissatisfied with the ruling may request a statement from TENK. 

TENK restricts its statement to questions of research integrity. Therefore its statements only state whether an RI investigation has been performed in accordance with the RI guidelines and whether there has been a violation of responsible conduct of research.

Direct references to involved parties and the organisations where the allegation in question was handled have been removed from the summaries. Summaries can be used e.g. for educational purposes under a CC BY license.

You can search the statement summaries by using the following filters. Links open in a new tab.

2016

A, a researcher, had made an RCR notification to the rector of a university of applied sciences. A alleged that B, a lecturer in technology in…

2016

A, a former doctoral student of a university presented the allegation that B, a researcher who had worked with him/her on a research project in…

2016

According to the RCR notification, the participants of a technology project in a university were alleged to be guilty of disregard for responsible…

2016

A researcher in pedagogics discovered text from his/her doctoral dissertation in a publication drawn up in cooperation between a university and a…

2015

In an RCR notification, professor A from a university claimed that professor Y and postgraduate student B from the same field, who had worked on a…

2015

Professor A and docent B suspected the international evaluation of a project led by A to have been biased, and that professor X, who acted as an…

2015

A, a postgraduate student in economics at a university, co-authored an article in Finnish with the leader of a research project, for inclusion in…

2015

TENK received a request for a statement from a specialist researcher Y in relation to the RCR investigation mentioned in…

2015

According to a decision by the director of a research institution, senior researcher A was, together with specialist researcher Y, guilty of…

2015

Docent A notified the rector of a university that humanities professor B from the university was guilty of making exaggerated claims on his/her…

2015

A university received an RCR notification in which person A suspected that his/her personal data and unpublished texts had been stolen. The…

2015

Researcher A alleged that research managers Y and B from a certain social science research institution were guilty of disregard for RCR in writing…

2014

TENK received a request for a statement which expressed dissatisfaction with an investigation on an RCR violation conducted by a university. The…

2014

TENK received a request for a statement which expressed dissatisfaction with a preliminary inquiry conducted on an RCR allegation of misconduct at…

2014

Two researchers submitted a request for TENK to issue a statement on whether a research institute acted correctly in handling an allegation of an…

2014

A researcher in medicine sent TENK a request for a statement concerning an RCR violation report he/she made to a university. According to the…

2013

Project researcher Y of research institute A was dissatisfied with two RCR investigations conducted at the institute. In one of them, project…

2013

Special researcher X of research institute A was dissatisfied with the RCR violation investigation conducted at the institute. The investigation…

2013

Postdoctoral researcher X requested the Advisory Board to take a position on whether university A acted accordingly in handling the allegations of…

2013

Doctor X requested TENK to clarify whether docent Y was guilty of disregard of research integrity in the restriction of the subject of his/her…