Researcher A felt that as they were not identified as one of the authors in a collection of works published by university X based on the work of a research group in the field of educational sciences, the other authors of the publication had disregarded the responsible conduct of research. A had resigned from the research group in question before the publication of the work due to a falling out with the group leader. A was dissatisfied with the university not initiating a preliminary inquiry in the matter.
According to the university, A had not participated in the editing of the work as the work had been done after their resignation. Furthermore, A was identified in the foreword of the publication.
According to TENK, the RCR allegation filed by A clearly identified an allegation related to research ethics. The allegation was justified and, based on the materials submitted to TENK, it was not clearly unfounded. In addition, the university gave a ruling in the matter without studying it further or consulting the parties involved.
TENK therefore concluded that the university should initiate a preliminary inquiry in accordance with the RCR process in the matter. TENK did not take a stand on the alleged RCR violation as it had not been studied in the RCR process yet.
On a general level, TENK mentioned in its statement that conducting a preliminary inquiry is important for the legal protection of the parties and also in terms of how just the reporter of the allegation feels the investigation procedure is.