Textbook based on background research carried out with a sufficient amount of attention

The party who requested a statement made a written report in 2011 on the allegation of unethical investigation methods in a textbook published by a university professor and a researcher. The textbook was based on a research project concerning the field of business. The university in question, on the basis of the report, did not start up the RCR process because according to it, it was question of a popular book and not an independent scientific study, nor was it furthermore a part of the university’s publication series.

After receiving TENK’s first statement (2011), according to which the university’s grounds for not beginning a preliminary investigation were unfounded, the university started up the RCR process for the case. Since no fabrication of research results or other fraud was found in the preliminary investigation and the deficiency concerning the handling of research materials mostly indicated mild carelessness, no official investigation was begun.

The party who requested the statement turned once more to TENK because he/ she was not satisfied with the methods followed in the preliminary investigation nor with the outcome. According to this party, the textbook was lacking care and accuracy.

In its second statement (2012), TENK recognised that the university had carried out the investigation in accordance with TENK’s guidelines.