Former Researcher A of University Y alleged that Professor B of University Y had committed an authorship violation. According to A, B had committed an RI violation by submitting an abstract for a conference presentation under A’s name against A’s will. A also alleged that an employee of University Y had granted data access to B on false grounds.
On the basis of a preliminary inquiry, the Rector of University X decided that this did not meet the criteria for an RI violation. In their request for a statement, A questioned whether the RI process had been carried out in accordance with the RI Guidelines (2023).
TENK considered that the inclusion of A’s name in the list of authors of the presentation was not an RI violation, as A had not requested that their name be removed from the list of authors.
TENK agreed with the Rector, and concluded that University Y had carried out the RI process in accordance with the 2023 RI Guidelines and B was not guilty of an RI violation.