Skip to main content

Main navigation

Menu
  • Responsible Research
  • Open Science
  • Committee for Public Information
  • Finnish National Board on Research Integrity TENK
  • Publication Forum
Home
Subject term search
SuomiSvenskaEnglish

Tutkimuseettinen neuvottelukunta

  • Etusivu
  • Research Integrity
  • Ethical Review
  • Advice and Materials
  • TENK
  • Projects
  1. Home
  2. Social sciences

Social sciences

Shortcomings related to the quality of a Master's thesis did not prove to be RI violations (TENK 2023:6)
6.6.2024
Rejection of an article in the peer review process was not an RCR violation (TENK 2022:7 and TENK 2022:8)
4.4.2023
The list of authors for the translated versions had to also be corrected. The rector’s decision should have named those responsible for the RCR violation. (TENK 2021:6)
1.6.2022
GSP allegation regarding a textbook must be investigated
28.5.2021
Rights of research group members should be settled beforehand
28.5.2021
Producing background material did not merit authorship in a research report (TENK 2020:13)
27.5.2021
An investigation proper was necessary because, in addition to inadequate anonymisation, there was a suspicion of a more serious RCR violation than reported (TENK 2020:9)
27.5.2021
Conflict of interest, malicious accusations and international cooperation in the RCR process (TENK 2020:8)
27.5.2021
Textbook based on background research carried out with a sufficient amount of attention
25.3.2021
Comparative research design was not plagiarism
25.3.2021
Further investigation of the translation of an article was needed
23.3.2021
Statistical interpretation differences were due to scientific dispute
23.3.2021

Pagination

  • 1
  • 2
  • › ››
  • » ››

Finnish National Board on Research Integrity TENK

Kirkkokatu 6
00170 Helsinki, Finland

tenk(at)tenk.fi

Contact information

Licensing

Feedback

Image
TENK logo.