Shortcomings in the procedures observed during a preliminary inquiry

One request for a statement asked whether a certain university should have conducted a full investigation in addition to the preliminary inquiry it had performed as the result of a GSP violation complaint, and if the procedures observed in relation to the case by the university in question were compliant with GSP procedures. The case involved both alleged violations of good scientific practice as well as various forms of misconduct and fraud related to a certain PhD thesis manuscript in the field of technology. The preliminary inquiry gave the university cause to take the view that, even though there were shortcomings in the citation practices of the thesis, a violation of GSP as defined by the Advisory Board had not occurred.

The Advisory Board’s statement reproached the procedure observed by the research organisation. Shortcomings were identified in, among other things, the manner with which the hearings of involved parties were documented. As the reply submitted by the university to the Advisory Board was also found to be of a general nature, the Advisory Board took the view that it would be in the best interest of all parties to conduct a full investigation of the matter. The Advisory Board did not opine on whether or not the researcher had committed a violation of good scientific practice because the matter was returned for deliberation to the university in question.