Researcher C from the field of science and technology, mentioned in the previous statement summary, requested a statement from TENK concerning the same decision by the university as researchers A and B. Researcher C was satisfied with the investigation at the university. However, C considered that A and B were guilty of maliciously accusing C of an RCR violation and inappropriately hampering their research career. Additionally, C saw that A and B had used the RCR process to manage disagreements and problems in the work community.
In its statement, TENK did not comment on the motives of the instigators of the RCR allegation. Concerning research integrity TENK stated that because the university’s investigation team had found some discrepancies and anomalies in C’s CV and advised C to amend them, the RCR allegation by A and B was not malicious. Therefore, instigating the RCR allegation was not inappropriate hampering of the work of another researcher.