An article’s use of sources was irresponsible, but it did not constitute a RCR violation. TENK did not comment in advance on the content of the dissertation. (TENK 2021:18) 1.6.2022
Misconduct found in the use of a non-peer-reviewed article for marketing a health test. The RCR process used to investigate the matter followed the RCR guidelines. (TENK 2021:15) 1.6.2022
The teachers’ activities on a course did not require an ethical review. The rector was allowed to transfer assessment of the case to the University Examination Board. (TENK 2021:13) 1.6.2022
A joint article cited the author’s previous joint publications in a deficient and inappropriate manner. Nevertheless, the criteria for plagiarism were not met. (TENK 2021:5) 1.6.2022
The error in a dissertation was larger than a single bibliographical citation, but not so serious that it would constitute a RCR violation. The corrective actions taken were sufficient. (TENK 2021:3) 1.6.2022
Fabrication and disregard for good scientific practice, and shortcomings in the investigative process for good scientific practice 28.5.2021
Freedom of teaching is part of university autonomy, the teaching was not found irresponsible (TENK 2020:11) 27.5.2021
Even if an ethical review might have been necessary, the act did not involve gross negligence or carelessness (TENK 2020:7) 27.5.2021
Failure to refer to an individual study did not constitute falsification or disregard for the responsible conduct of research (TENK 2020:3) 27.5.2021
Failure to refer to an individual study was not falsification and sources of financing had been announced appropriately (TENK 2020:1) 27.5.2021
