Scientific Integrity

See the Dutch version of this page for the annual reports and policy document.

Research with human subjects must undergo a medical ethical review if it falls under the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) (in Dutch). Research falls under the WMO if the following two criteria are met:

1. it is medical/scientific research, and
2. people are subjected to procedures or are required to follow rules of behaviour.

More information regarding research that falls under the WMO can be found at the website of the Central Committee on Research involving Human Subjects (CCMO). For the medical-ethical review the University of Twente collaborates with an accredited medical research ethics committee (MREC), the METC Oost-Nederland (in Dutch). The TechMed Centre offers support for researchers submitting their proposal for medical-ethical review at a MREC. Please contact: ResearchSupport-TechMed@utwente.nl or visit the TechMed Centre intranet.

The University of Twente follows the Dutch Code for transparency in animal testing (in Dutch) and has its own animal testing policy. The University of Twente understand the concerns in politics and society with regard to the use of test animals in scientific research. Before researchers can make use of animals in scientific research, all research needs to be reviewed and approved by the Central Authority for Scientific Procedures on Animals (CCD). The CCD bases its decision on a recommendation by an Animal Experiments Committee (in Dutch: Dierexperimenten Commissie, DEC). The TechMed Centre offers support for researchers submitting their proposal for laboratory animal research at the CCD. Please contact: animal-ethics@utwente.nl or visit the TechMed Centre intranet.

A university-wide committee, consisting of the chairs and vice-chairs of the domain-specific committees, is responsible for ethical review of complex and/or controversial research proposals related to two or more domains. It also acts as an appeals committee in case of an objection against an issued advice of a domain-specific committee. For more information, please contact the university-wide committee: ethicscommittee@utwente.nl.

CWI

Based on the Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, the Executive Board of the University of Twente set up the Scientific Integrity Committee (CWI). A complaint about a (possible) violation of scientific integrity are handled by the CWI. This committee assesses the complaint confidentially in accordance with the UT complaints procedure and advises the Executive Board. The CWI comprised of several employees (1 from EEMCS, 3 from TNW and 1 from BMS) and 2 emeriti from the University of Twente. Amongst the members, the chair of the CWI is prof.dr. M.A. (Michiel) Heldeweg LLM, and the vice-chair is prof.dr.ir. L. (Leon) Lefferts. 

Complaints or questions should be addressed to the secretary of the committee, ms J. (Jessica) Greven LLB, email: cwi@utwente.nl

handling COMMITTEE

Securing a safe environment is an important factor in handling scientific integrity complaints, also according to the CWI. The CWI therefore makes all the effort to act accordingly. Based on the complaint that the secretary receives, the handling committee is formed. The independence of the members of the handling committee that handles the complaint is assessed and discussed (if necessary with the executive board) when a complaint is received. This assessment includes the question: ‘can the member (chairperson included) fulfill their role in the committee with sufficient impartiality and independence?’, taking into account the starting point as mentioned in article 5 of the complaints procedure. This includes the chairperson, in which case a vice-chair is appointed. 

CWI PROCEDURE

When a complaint is filed, the CWI assesses the admissibility of the complaint. If the complaint is declared admissible, the defendant will be given the opportunity to submit a statement of defence. The CWI assesses the complaint substantively and can hear both parties by means of a hearing. The committee also has the option of appointing experts or calling witnesses. Eventually, the CWI gives an advice to the Executive Board and the Executive Board will make its intended decision. If one of the parties don’t agree with the intended decision, this party can lodge a request within 6 weeks to the LOWI (national body of research integrity) to give advice. The Executive Board’s decision becomes final after 6 weeks, if no request is lodged. If a request is lodged to the LOWI, the Executive Board will make its final decision after the advice of the LOWI. The complaint is published anonymously on the national UNL website ('Universiteiten van Nederland').

Non-compliance with the standards of research integrity

The Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity provides guidelines for the CWI to assess the non-compliance including the weighting factors to use in this regard. For the qualification of the non-compliance, the Code distinguishes between ‘research misconduct’, ‘questionable research practices’ and ‘minor shortcomings’. In case of non-compliance, the question is whether it is necessary or desirable to impose sanctions or to take other measures. The Executive Board makes this decision.

CONFIDENTIAL ADVISORS

For the complainant, the first point of contact is the independent university's confidential adviser for scientific integrity. The available confidential adviser is prof.dr. Jan Eijkel (j.c.t.eijkel@utwente.nl) (emeritus). The complainant is advised to speak with a confidential adviser before filing a complaint to the committee. Possible violations of scientific integrity as well as any follow-up steps can be discussed with them in all confidence.

For the accused staff member of the UT who have faced a complaint with regards to their integrity can, if they so desire, be assisted by the independent university's confidential adviser for the defendant, Prof.dr Alfred Stein, who can be reached at: a.stein@utwente.nl. The confidential adviser knows the rules and procedures and can support the defendant. The defendant can share his or her doubts and concerns with this confidential adviser and this confidential advisor can also provide aftercare services.

Lessons learned

Most important lessons learned from 2021 and 2022 (more information can be found in the annual reports below) :

1. All parties involved in a CWI-case will henceforth be informed about the entire composition of the ad-hoc committee that will handle the complaint, with the possibility to express objection to the composition.
2. To improve anonymity, each complaint received is henceforth discussed by the secretary with the chair anonymously and, as previously, confidentially, in order to assess what the composition of the handling committee could be and whether the chair of the CWI can be part of it. This assessment is part of the procedure. In addition, a vice-chair is appointed. 
3. Despite the fact that every potential complainant retains the right to actually launch a complaint according to the complaints procedure, the UT encourages to handle cases in a peer-to-peer setting before a CWI complaint procedure commences.
4. The CWI procedure is a complaints procedure with a formal administrative decision. This will henceforth be emphasized to parties involved, in which the submitter acts as the 'complainant'.
5. Despite the formal nature of the complaints process, a personal approach will be pursued.
6. Aftercare is an important aspect and will be invested in.
7. The primary goal is ‘to learn lessons' for all involved: a complaint submitted does not necessarily mean a violation, violations occur in different degrees and not every violation justifies imposing sanctions. The UT trusts its employees and their scientifically ethical behaviour. 
8. Taking into account anonymity as the most important aspect, the CWI and Executive Board strive to be more transparent to the UT-community about lessons learned, for example by including these lessons learned on this website more explicitly.

Investigated complaintS

The outcome of the complaints that are handled substantially will be published anonymously on the national UNL website ('Universiteiten van Nederland'). If a LOWI advice was given, the LOWI will publish their advice anonymously on the LOWI website. Below, you can find an overview of investigated complaints of research integrity within the UT.

Performing ancillary activities, such as external advising or management work, generally has a positive effect on the connections that a scientist makes with society. This type of activities therefore perfectly fits with the entrepreneurial attitude that the University of Twente wants to encourage amongst her academic staff. In order to make clear agreements about this and guarantee the scientific integrity, the UT follows the sectoral scheme covering ancillary activities. These regulations apply to all Dutch universities.

Research data management is crucial to warrant the quality, reliability, reproducibility, and verification of scientific research. It supports the (re)use of data and its accessibility for third parties. Careful data management warrants compliance with requirements by funders imposed on researchers. The research data policy at the UT formulates general guidelines regarding data management and the responsibilities of researchers and institutes.

For day-to-day support regarding data management such as data management protocols and data storage, researchers can turn to the Service Portal page Research support. 

Scientific integrity is an integral part of the educational curricula at the University of Twente. At bachelor, master and post-graduate level students are educated in good academic practice. Students' attention is drawn towards undesirable practices such as plagiarism and fraud. The student charter contains explicit rules and regulations regarding plagiarism and fraud. At the Twente Graduate School dedicated courses are offered on scientific integrity and PhD students are educated in the professional standards of academic practices as applied in the Netherlands and neighbouring countries.

CODES OF CONDUCT UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE

The University of Twente has a number of codes of conduct related to integrity. In addition to the UT code of ethics, there exists a code regarding ICT and internet use, and a code regarding (sexual) harassment, intimidation agression, violence and discrimination.

REGULATIONS UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE

In addition to the codes of conduct several regulations exist to stimulate and warrant good behaviour. The UT has a general complaints procedure, dedicated regulations regarding intellectual property rights, and a reporting of irregularities scheme (whistleblower procedure).

CONFIDENTIAL ADVISORS

The Executive Board has appointed four members of staff to act in the capacity of confidential advisor. These four employees perform their duties as confidential advisor in addition to their regular job. The confidential advisor advises and supports individual staff members who are confronted with unacceptable behaviour like intimidation, (sexual) harassment, aggression, violence, discrimination, bullying or stalking. UT staff can also approach the confidential advisor in case of a workplace conflict related to or arising from unacceptable behaviour. PhD candidates, too, may call on the confidential advisor. Bachelor's and master's students may not, however. These students can approach any of the student counsellors should they be confronted with unacceptable behaviour.

Good research practices imply that researchers take into account relevant ethical norms and standards, as well as observing statutory regulations. In the case of research a broad set of regulations apply. The table below offers an overview of regulations. The overview is not comprehensive, additional rules and regulations on national, supranational or local levels may apply.

Watch the dialogues about scientific integrity dilemma's through our YouTube playlist Building a House of Integrity.    

TRY OUT THE DILLEMA GAME APP

Watch how our University of Twente colleagues Jeroen Rouwkema and Frances Wijnen use the dilemma game app.

This dilemma game was developed as one of the initiatives of the Erasmus University Rotterdam Taskforce Scientific Integrity (chaired by prof.dr. Finn Wynstra). The objective of the taskforce has been to raise awareness for and to develop proposals to help maintain scientific professionalism and integrity. The HR department has two hardcopy games avalaible. Please contact the HR secretariat (secretariaat-hr@utwente.nl /tel: 8012) if you would like to use them.

This 56-minute film On Being a Scientist was produced for educational purposes by Leiden University. It aims to raise students’ awareness of scientific integrity and to prepare them for the problems and dilemmas they could encounter as scientists.

Source and Intellectual property: Leiden University

Faculty ITC brought this topic of academic integrity to the attention of all staff and students through a seminar: “If Academic Integrity of the solution, what is the problem?" on 4 March 2020. Please find the presentations that have been given below.

More information on this seminar and other ethics workshops can be found on the ITC Ethics committee website.

Watch the online presentation of Peter-Paul Verbeek for the University Wide Ethics Committee about the ethical work he is engaged in within our University.