Statement 8 (TENK 2025:8): A series of publications violated good research practices in a broad sense, but deficiencies in the investigation committee’s report and the Rector’s decision led TENK to refer the case back to the university for reconsideration 24.8.2026
Adding acknowledgements to the digital version of an article was deemed a sufficient correction in an RI dispute (TENK 2024:21) 16.4.2025
Missing acknowledgements related to the collection of interview data did not alone constitute an RI violation (TENK 2024:17) 16.4.2025
Insufficient acknowledgement for material collection in a conference abstract was deemed to be irresponsible conduct (TENK 2024:9) 16.4.2025
Based on an email from a close relative, there was no evidence that the respondents had actively impeded a researcher's career (TENK 2024:6) 16.4.2025
The negligence of a dissertation supervisor was not gross, and publishing visual materials similar to the supervisee's was not an RI violation (TENK 2024:4) 16.4.2025
The publication of a project's results led to a long-term dispute. However, the criteria for an RI violation were not met (TENK 2024:3) 16.4.2025
Similarities between projects were not sufficient to determine misappropriation because the similarities were considered to be common in university research projects (TENK 2024:2) 16.4.2025
Shortcomings related to the quality of a Master's thesis did not prove to be RI violations (TENK 2023:6) 6.6.2024
The grounds for the President's decision were not sufficient to establish research misconduct. The transitional provisions between the RI Guidelines had been interpreted incorrectly (TENK 2023:5) 6.6.2024
