An association in the field of medicine and health sciences suspected that a doctoral dissertation in its field included plagiarism. It was a matter of similarities between a theoretical model and a figure included in the dissertation. The association had notified the doctoral candidate, their supervisor and the faculty in question before public examination of the dissertation. The university investigated the matter at the faculty level mostly from the perspective of copyright.
In its first statement concerning the matter, TENK stated that an RCR process should be initiated for any alleged violations of research ethics if the permission to defend the thesis has already been granted. The university should therefore initiate a new inquiry in accordance with the RCR process in the matter. (TENK 2017:6)
The university decided, in accordance with the investigation committee’s report, that the controversial figure in the dissertation was an independent scientific entity in which no references needed to be included. Furthermore, the dissertation presented the relationship of the figure to the theoretical model in question as appropriate. The association was not, however, satisfied with this ruling, and it requested a statement from TENK in the matter.
In its statement, TENK agreed with the university’s opinion that this was not a case of RCR violation. TENK did, however, state that referencing the original source would have been desirable also in the figure included in the dissertation’s conclusions. The lack of reference did not, however, meet the characteristics of disregard specified in the RCR guidelines, mostly in the form of denigrating the role of other researchers and referring to earlier research results inadequately or inappropriately.