Professor A suspected that university director B was guilty of both misappropriation of another researchers’ work and exaggeration of their CV because B had publications in their Google Scholar profile that they had not been a part of. Based on the preliminary inquiry, the suspicion proved to be unfounded. Professor A was dissatisfied with the conclusion of the RCR process and requested a statement from TENK.
According to TENK, exaggeration in a CV is included in other irresponsible practices according to the RCR 2012 guidelines. Such a case could only be assessed as an RCR violation if it constituted severe misconduct.
In its statement, TENK agreed with the assessment of the person conducting the preliminary inquiry that the contested publications had ended up in B’s profile by Google Scholar’s automated search. In addition, as B had not further used this incorrect list of publications, for example by referring to it in job or funding applications, there was no reason to suspect an RCR violation. However, TENK agreed with A’s view that B as a researcher had been responsible for the accuracy and up-to-datedness of the information published in their public profile.