TENK could not rule out an RCR violation concerning materials used in a conference presentation (TENK 2022:21) 4.4.2023
Not using p values provided as additional information in an article was not an RCR violation (TENK 2022:18) 4.4.2023
Finnish researcher was not responsible for RCR violations suspected by a foreign professor (TENK 2022:14) 4.4.2023
Rejection of an article in the peer review process was not an RCR violation (TENK 2022:7 and TENK 2022:8) 4.4.2023
Omission from the list of authors or not being named in an introduction did not prove to be RCR violations (TENK 2022:5) 4.4.2023
Researchers must ensure that information about them in public expert profiles is accurate (TENK 2022:1) 4.4.2023
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 2021:22) 1.6.2022
The grounds for misappropriation identified in the RCR process were not sufficient (TENK 2021:19) 1.6.2022
