Topic: Research misconduct

What is research misconduct?

The Norwegian Research Ethics Act distinguishes between scientific misconduct and cases of misconduct. Scientific misconduct is defined as follows: 

«Scientific misconduct means falsification, fabrication, plagiarism and other serious violations of recognised norms of research ethics that have been committed intentionally or with gross negligence in the planning, implementation or reporting of research» (Section 8, second paragraph).

Falsification, fabrication and plagiarism (often abbreviated FFP) are highlighted as serious violations, as they clearly breach the norm of truth in research. The norm of truth is linked to factuality, accuracy, transparency, and accountability, and is a prerequisite for the reliability and quality of research. For more on the norm of truth and other research ethical norms, see Introduction to research ethics. For more on breaches of good scientific practice, see A serious breach of good scientific practice (Norwegian only).

In the Research Ethics Act, cases of possible violations of recognised norms of research ethics are referred to as «cases of misconduct». (Section 6 of the Research Ethics Act). In the preparatory works for the Research Ethics Act, a distinction is made between «serious and less serious cases of such possible violations» (Proposition No. 158 L (2015–2016), chapter 5.2.1).

Research ethics guidelines and guides prepared by the National Research Ethics Committees (NREC) do not use the term «scientific misconduct». These guidelines are aimed at promoting good scientific practice and are advisory resources for use in training and research. The National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities (NESH) refers to plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, distortion and concealment as 'incompatible with good scientific practice' (NESH 2021, guidelines 10-12). The National Committee for Research Ethics in Science and Technology (NENT) similarly focuses on good scientific practice and possible deviations from this (NENT 2024, guidelines 5-8).

Medical and health research projects must be pre-approved by a regional ethics committee (REK), in accordance with the Health Research Act (see info box). Projects lacking approval or failing to meet conditions of approval can be reported to the Norwegian Board of Health Supervision.

Extent of misconduct in Norway

In 2018, the National Research Ethics Committees, the University of Bergen and Western Norway University of Applied Sciences published the first report from the national RINO survey (Research Integrity in Norway). The survey included almost 7,300 respondents. Of these, 66 people admitted to involvement in FFP over the past three years: 12 admitted fabrication, 19 falsification and 35 plagiarism.

Just over 40% of respondents said they had engaged in at least one questionable practice in the last three years, such as unjustified authorship or copying citations..

A separate study among PhD candidates and researchers at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, looked at misconduct from 2010-2020. 1.1 per cent of the participants reported involvement in FFP. 0.9 per cent reported presenting results in a misleading manner. The study also found that attitudes and behaviours changed little over the ten-year period.

How to prevent misconduct?

The report Questionable research practices: attitudes and actions [Diskutabel forskningspraksis: holdninger og handlinger] from the RINO survey discussed possible explanations for the high prevalence of questonable research practices (see above). A key finding was a lack of training: Nearly 40 per cent of the respondents had never received training in research ethics. 

In Norway, research institutions are responsible for training those involved in research. One of the main roles for NREC is to support institutions in this task. NREC has prepared research ethics guidelines and guides, which are advisory resources for training and research. Some apply across disciplines, while others are field-specific.

For more on recognised norms of research ethics, see Introduction to research ethics

NREC has also prepared Fostering research ethics: A guide for research performing organisations (2023), aimed at supporting institutions in fulfilling their broad responsibility for research ethics.

All EU-funded projects must follow The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ALLEA 2023), developed by All European Academies (ALLEA). See: Comments on the review of the ALLEA code from NREC

Handling of misconduct cases

According to the Research Ethics Act (§ 6), possible breaches of recognized research ethical norms must be handled by the research institutions. 

The research institutions must have research integrity committees, and they must report cases of possible serious breaches to  the National Commission for the Investigation of Research Misconduct (the Investigation Commission).

For reporting to the Investigation Committee, see the Guide for Research Institutions' Reporting to the Investigation Commission [Norwegian only].

The Investigation Commission is part of NREC and works on preventing misconduct and advising institutions, particularly on the processing of cases. The Commission also serves as an appeals body in cases where a researcher has been found guilty of misconduct. Any appeal must be made by the researcher himself. The investigation committee may also initiate investigations on its own. 

See statements by the commission.

Researchers are expected — and in some cases obliged — to report breaches of research ethics (NENT 2024, guideline 21). At the same time, they are responsible for assessing the possible consequences of such whistleblowing and for identifying the most appropriate channels to minimize conflict.

The European Network of Research Integrity Offices (ENRIO) has prepared a Handbook for the protection of whistleblowers in research.

For information on systems for handling misconduct in other European countries, see reports from the European Network of Research Integrity Offices (ENRIO).