Abstract
The chapter deals with the description of the author's university research integrity dissemination system. The scientific infrastructure of the classical university is shown (by the example of Sumy State University); SWOT-analysis of scientific activity in terms of observing the principles of research integrity is carried out. Some cases of violation of the principles of research integrity (Ukraine as a case study) are presented. The blocks of the research integrity dissemination system in various sectors of research activity are described. The activity of the university center for technology transfer and coordination of research integrity in the scientific activity of the university is presented.
TopIntroduction
The ancient wisemen said: in order to protect oneself from evil, one must renounce it – “If I do not see evil, do not hear about evil, and do not say anything about it, then I am protected from it”. A similar phrase is in the book of Confucius “Lun Yu”: “Do not look at what is wrong; do not listen to what is wrong; do not say what is wrong”. Among the Slavs, the most popular version is “I do not see anything, I do not hear anything, I will not tell anyone”, which actually characterizes detachment from the problem and unwillingness to solve it. It is here that a parallel is drawn between ancient philosophy and the modern state of the scientific world, which is subject to constant attacks by pseudo-scientists and hunters for quantitative indicators and easy scientific prey. The distorted expression of the ancient wisemen is the best description of the state, which ever wider areas of scientific research were “infected” with. These areas are subject to the influence of fraudsters who are ready for any scientific “crimes” for the sake of their vanity. The consequence of this “infection” is an increase in cases of violation of the principles of research integrity and impunity for committing these violations.
However, the words of the ancient wisemen have a continuation: “do not do what is wrong”, “if I do not commit evil, then I am protected from it”. Compliance with this rule is the basis of the system of research integrity and the ethics of academic relationships.
Figure 1.
“If I do not see evil, do not hear about evil, do not say anything about it, and do not do what is wrong then I am protected from it” - basis of the system of research integrity and the ethics of academic relationships
It is crucial that researchers acquire knowledge, methodology of research and ethical practices in their field of activity. Failure to follow best research practices leads to violations in the performance of one’s own professional duties. All this harms the research processes, worsens the relationship between researchers, undermines the credibility of the research and its authority, spends resources and can damage research subjects, users, society or the environment.
The scientist is at the crossroads: to achieve quantitative indicators (while sacrificing quality) or to achieve a qualitative breakthrough in a scientific research with the prospect of its commercialization (Aryukhov, 2015; Artyukhov & Liuta, 2017).
The answer in this case is unambiguous (although it is very difficult for someone): the quality of scientific research is not for the sake of quantitative indicators, but for the sake of successful implementation in industry. Otherwise − see Figure 2.
Figure 2. Scientific research and research integrity: quantitative indicators or real implementation of useful innovations?
Key Terms in this Chapter
Research Integrity: A set of ethical principles and statutory rules that should guide the participants in the scientific community while conducting scientific (creative) activities in order to ensure confidence in scientific (creative) achievements.
Research Infrastructure: A set of interrelated scientific service units that make up and provide the basis for the functioning of the system for the implementation of scientific research and their results publication.
Pseudoscience: Activity or scientists, represented by supporters (advocates) as scientific, but in fact they are not.
Research Misconduct (?rime): Manifestations of research integrity arising in the development, conduct, analysis of research, or in the publication of research results.
Valley of Death: An insurmountable obstacle on the way, caused by the difference in the mentality of the participants in the dialogue (the teacher-the younger generation, the university-industry) and the lack of a common goal and motivation for mutually beneficial cooperation.