WS1: Lessons Learned: The Importance of Early Integrity Risk Identification in Research; 22 September @13:30
This is an INVITED workshop.
Organized by Grace van Arkel and Ibo Van de Poel
22 September @13:30
Room: TBD
This workshop focuses on lessons learned from a Dutch research integrity case which gained (inter)national attention and on one lesson in particular: the importance of early risk identification in light of power dynamics to prevent possible violations of research integrity. By means of introduction, presenters (i) in short explain the Dutch national research integrity structure and code, and (ii) give a summary of the Dutch case and overview of lessons learned from the Dutch case (which resulted in Recommendations and an Action Plan and implementation hereof within the Institution). The focus in the workshop will be on the action addressed to the research institute’s director and deans of the faculties holding the duty of care of risk identification in an early stage of the research and offering possibilities to have these risks and risk-increasing factors (partly influenced by power dynamics) openly discussed within the research institute and faculties. An interactive part follows and starts with discussing a research integrity dilemma dealing with risks in research (to be found in the EUR Dilemma Game App) followed by a discussion of the different answers to this dilemma. After the discussion, presenters return to the Dutch case, sharing the results they gained from discussions with the Institution’s Executive Board, Deans and Director on general and specific risk-increasing factors within the different faculties resp. the research institute. Next, attendees are asked – based on formats which will be handed over – to answer the following questions for their own institutions (1) what general and specific risk-increasing factors are they faced with and are presenters’ examples recognizable or do attendees’ institutions deal with other risks? (2) is there room for discussing risk-increasing factors in their institutions? (3) if not, does internal or external power dynamics have an impact on an open discussion? and (4) which ways are there (or can attendees think of) in mitigating (possible) risk-increasing factors? The objectives are (1) to give insight in the Netherlands research integrity structure including its binding code of conduct for research integrity, holding an institutional duty of care to have dilemmas on research integrity openly discussed with researchers, and (2) to share experiences with others in and outside Europe on general and specific risk-increasing factors in research which may lead to possible violations of research integrity. Conclusion: in this workshop lessons learned from a Dutch research integrity case are shared, hereby stressing the importance of early integrity risk identification in research in order to prevent possible violations of research integrity standards. With the workshop presenters hope to get insight into the question whether and how researchers in other institutions in and outside Europe deal with general and specific integrity risks in research leading to possible violations of research integrity.
Registration is mandatory and limited to 25 participants. Hurry and register for the workshop using the form linked below.
WS2: The Future is Now: AI, Academic Ethics and the Science Communication; 22 September @12:00
Organised by Reda Cimmperman, Rima Sinickė, and Kristina Puzarienė
22 September @12:00
Room: TBD
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is no longer something we’re waiting for – it’s already here, changing how we teach, learn, and communicate science. In university classrooms, students are using AI tools to write, summarize, brainstorm and create visuals. These technologies can support learning and creativity, they also raise difficult questions: What does academic ethics look like when AI is involved? How can we fairly assess student work? And how do we prepare students to use these tools responsibly? What does responsible authorship look like when AI is involved? How do we evaluate originality and critical thinking? And how do we teach future communicators to use AI tools ethically and transparently? This workshop brings together students, academic staff and experts in ethics and science communication for an open and important conversation. We will begin with a brief introduction and reflections on the key challenges we are facing. Then, in the World Café format, participants will move into small group discussions focused on three key questions: 1. Where is AI taking us? What changes are we seeing in teaching and science communication and how can we adapt? 2. How can we keep assessment fair? In an academic environment where AI tools are widely accessible, how do we understand original work? 3. What should we be teaching students about AI? What skills, values and ethical understanding do students need to use AI responsibly? After the group discussions, we’ll come back together to share ideas, questions and good practices. If you are already using AI in your teaching or just starting to think about it, this is a space to learn from each other, compare experiences and explore practical solutions. The workshop is hosted by the Office of the Ombudsperson for Academic Ethics and Procedures of the Republic of Lithuania, which works to support fairness, responsibility and trust in academic life. In 2024, the Office became a national and regional hub in the EU-funded COALESCE project, joining a European network of institutions working to strengthen science communication through collaboration, training, and community building. This session is part of our broader commitment to helping universities respond to new ethical challenges in a fast-changing world. If you care about academic integrity, responsible teaching or the future of science communication – we warmly invite you to join us.
Registration is mandatory and limited to 50 participants. Hurry and register for the workshop using the form linked below.
WS3: The BEYOND BAD APPLES Project’s Resource Guides on Addressing Misconduct and Promoting Research Integrity; 22 September @13:45
Organized by Rosemarie Bernabe, Kadri Simm, Tonje Lossius Husum, Alina Coman, Valerie Gaudin, Eero Kaila, Vivian Mbanya, Ian Slesinger, and Signe Mežinska
22 September @13:45
Room: TBD
Workshop (90 min) The Horizon EU Project BEYOND BAD APPLES is a multinational collaboration exploring how both individual and institutional responsibilities relate to research misconduct (RM), research ethics (RE), and research integrity (RI). As we progress towards our final goals, including the publication of the BEYOND Guidelines and Best Practices Manual and the 2030 Roadmap—a set of guidance documents that will hopefully usher in a systematic change in focus from ‘bad apples’—a type of understanding of research misconduct as a problem stemming from the unethical actions of individual researchers—towards a more holistic approach that includes and emphasizes structural factors. In this workshop, we seek to share our insights and invite valuable input from attendees to refine and enhance our efforts. 1. Welcome and introduction (5 minutes) – Introduction by project lead Rosemarie de la Cruz Bernabe – Workshop’s objectives and format. 2. Presentations from the working groups (25 minutes) – Short presentations from project’s groups, working on the documents: • BEYOND Guidelines: the scope of these guidelines is to address RM and promote RI. These guidelines are intended to supplement existing standard operating procedures in RE. They will facilitate the adoption of gained knowledge for various key stakeholders, including researchers and research publishing organizations. • Best Practice Manual: This case-based, context-sensitive, and practice-oriented best practice manual includes effective measures to promote RE/RI and address RM. This manual is intended for students, researchers (junior and senior), citizen scientists, research publishing organizations, research funding organizations, and regulators. • 2030 Roadmap: The BEYOND 2030 Roadmap sets a 5-year medium to long-term agenda for improving institutional research culture around research ethics and integrity. Based on results from the BEYOND project it outlines solutions to improve institutional research culture in terms of RE/RI based on areas of need identified through the project research. 3. Open forum for feedback and questions (15 minutes) – Attendees share thoughts, ask questions, and are informed of necessary topics and concepts relevant to the next exercise. 4. Small-group work sessions (30 minutes) – Small-group discussions facilitated by project members, covering the following topics: • Group work on the Guidelines (multiple small groups on different chapters, if possible) • Group work on Best Practice Manual • Groupwork on Roadmap 5. Summaries from small groups (10 min) – The groups get back together, and share their insights, recommendations and criticisms. 6. Closing remarks and next steps (5 min) – Summary of key insights from the workshop. Invitation to stay connected with the BEYOND project and updates on upcoming milestones.
Registration is mandatory and limited to 50 participants. Hurry and register for the workshop using the form linked below.
WS4: Unlocking Synergies: The IP-OS Best Practice Manual and Capacity Building Programme in 27 countries; 23 September @11:30
Organized by Julia Priess-Buchheit and Marie Alavi
23 September @11:30
Room: TBD
Integrating Intellectual Property (IP) management with Open Science (OS) practices is crucial in the ever-evolving research and innovation landscape. This workshop introduces the “best practice manual called Synergy Framework,” a pivotal component of the IP4OS HorizonEurope project, designed to enhance the valorisation of knowledge through an aligned IP-OS approach. This workshop will delve into the core of the best practice manual, which offers strategic guidance for harmonising IP management with the openness ethos of science, adhering to the motto “as open as possible, as closed as necessary.” The manual – developed on evidence from the European community – presents workshop participants with accessible good practice examples and tools to align Os with fitting IP. Our workshop will illuminate best practices, providing insights for the participants to foster knowledge and skills to bolster IP management in an OS-friendly manner. After short presentations, we will start with a single learning unit on AI, IP and OS to show the participants (beginners to professionals) what it means to deepen their knowledge. Further, we will invite participants to invite institutions from their countries into the capacity-building programme of IP4OS to enrich their institution’s capabilities, encompassing the Synergy Core Curriculum and establishing teams to support their researchers in IP decisions. The workshop will engage the participants through dialogical activities such as fishbowl and small team challenges, with the collaborative efforts of the diverse IP4OS team—including thought leaders in IP, OS, technology transfer, and science communication. We ensure that the complex topic stays with the audience’s real-world challenges and experiences and gives a good entry point to the Best Practice Manual and training resources. Attendees will gain insights into effectively applying IP-OS principles within their respective fields, ultimately contributing to enhancing RESPONSIBLE and TRUSTWORTHY research valorisation within the European Research Area.
Registration is mandatory and limited to 50 participants. Hurry and register for the workshop using the form linked below.
WS5: Authorship and research integrity issues: Workshopping solutions to a chronic problem; 23 September @16:00
Organised by Anni Sairio, Petra Falin, Eero Kaila, Kalle Videnoja, and Oona Myllyntaus
23 September @16:00
Room: TBD
Authorship issues continue to be prevalent in research misconduct allegations and investigations and in the queries that for example Finland’s research integrity advisors receive, despite various institutional and national guidelines and training resources in place. Factors such as discipline-specific practices in multidisciplinary projects, power imbalances and the effects of quantitative metrics in research assessment and research funding play a role in authorship problems, and preventive discussions may be difficult to navigate. For example, training tends to be targeted at early-career researchers, but PIs and senior researchers have more decision-making and social power. We propose a workshop that brings together RI practitioners, researchers, trainers and educators, and other experts working in fields where authorship issues are relevant to discuss the current situation in authorship issues and how to implement best practices. In this workshop, we will:- Chart current and emerging issues that should be addressed in authorship guidance and training – Discuss how to implement authorship guidelines and practices in research communities, particularly with a preventive aim – Equip participants with take-home messages through mutual learning and knowledge-sharing and with a summary of key insights Authorship issues are best avoided by open and transparent discussions and agreements in the beginning of projects, so the premise of the workshop is in preventive measures. Workshop structure: – Programme and instructions: 10 minutes Current and emerging authorship issues: 35 minutes, consisting of 1) small group discussions (15 minutes) and 2) collective working (20 minutes) – Best practices in preventing problems and effecting change: 35 minutes, consisting of 1) small group discussions (15 minutes) and 2) collective working (20 minutes) – Final conclusions and a reminder: what will you take home with you? (10 minutes) After the event, the organisers provide the participants with a document of the key insights of the workshop. The participants are asked to read Cooke et al (2021) before the workshop.
S.J. Cooke et al (2021) Ten strategies for avoiding and overcoming authorship conflicts in academic publishing. FACETS. 6: 1753-1770. https://doi.org/10.1139/facets-2021-0103
Registration is mandatory and limited to 30 participants. Hurry and register for the workshop using the form linked below.
WS6: A primer to using open scholarly metadata for research integrity; 24 September @11:30
Organised by Evans Atoni and Madhura Amdekar
24 September @11:30
Room: TBD
This workshop is for researchers, research integrity officers, members of research funding organisations, and others, to introduce them to scholarly metadata and the tools and techniques they can use to retrieve metadata for assessing the integrity of research outputs. The scholarly record consists of research outputs such as journal articles, book chapters, datasets, software, preprints, and more. Metadata about each of these outputs also forms a part of the scholarly record and conveys important information about these items. Crossref is a community-governed, not-for-profit membership organisation that enables its members to register metadata and persistent identifiers (DOIs) for the work that they publish. Made up of over 165 million research outputs from over 21,000 members, the metadata registered with Crossref is a rich and open source of data for researchers and several downstream services. In addition to basic metadata such as titles, publication dates, names of authors, journal titles, members also deposit metadata on funding information, post-publication updates (retractions and corrections), relationships between research outputs (e.g. “is review of”, “is preprint of”) and more. This data is made openly available via Crossref’s APIs and therefore can be a valuable resource for assessing the integrity of published work – providing context for individual outputs, as well as for conducting research on research at scale. In this session, we will introduce the participants to the metadata that is deposited by the scholarly community with Crossref, and how this can act as trust signals about scholarly works. We will provide an overview of the metadata elements that are of most relevance in the context of research integrity, such as affiliation metadata, funding metadata, retraction metadata (including retractions and corrections from the Retraction Watch database which has been acquired by Crossref and integrated into our REST API), and how they are connected to each other. We will demonstrate how to construct topical API queries to retrieve this metadata to answer questions such as: Which works have been funded by specific funders? Which of these funded works have been retracted? Which works have been retracted? How to find works associated with your institution? How to find works published by a specific research organisation that have been retracted? During the remainder of the session, the participants will have the opportunity to try their hands at building API queries to retrieve metadata of their interest and ask any questions. We hope that with information from this session, not only will the participants learn how to use open metadata to track the outputs of their research institutions, but they will also be able to see the value of metadata as a tool available to them for assessing the integrity of work produced by the scholarly community.
Registration is mandatory and limited to 30 participants. Hurry and register for the workshop using the form linked below.
WS7: Case-based approach for new and emerging issues in research ethics and integrity training; 24 September @11:30
Organised by Kadri Simm, Mari-Liisa Parder, Heldi Marleen Lang, and Emmi Jennina Kaaya
24 September @11:30
Room: TBD
Popular case-based approaches to research ethics and integrity (REI) are promising also in addressing new and emerging topics, such as topics related to AI use, ethical issues related to citizen science and the rehabilitation of researchers. Starting from the 1980 in business ethics, case-based approaches, which have been found to be effective [1], are now applied also in REI trainings (e.g. Rotterdam dilemma game, Virtue training materials). Current material focuses on values discussion via games [2] and is adapted to REI training. The material is designed to develop competences needed for dialogic communication, including: 1) skills for listening and responding, 2) openness, 3) empathy, and 4) mutuality orientation [3] [4]. What differentiates this material from other similar material is the fact that the provided solutions to the cases are informed by four ethical theories: deontology, utilitarianism, care ethics and virtue ethics. The aim of the material is not to teach a single “right” answer to the dilemma, but to highlight the potential conflicts between two or more valuable ethical principles to carry out moral reasoning. The material includes a group-based activity designed to foster ethical competencies. It combines individual tasks – such as taking first personal responsibility by choosing one’s own solution with collaborative work, including discussing the case, proposed solutions, their underlying motivations and values, and potentially reaching a consensus. The material also presents dilemmas in their broader environmental and situational context.
Registration is mandatory and limited to 30 participants. Hurry and register for the workshop using the form linked below.
WS8: Enhancing Research Ethics Training in the Age of AI: Insights from a European Multi-Institutional Needs Assessment; 24 September @14:00
Organised by Vasileios Stamatopoulos, Dimitris Kyriazanos, Effrosyni Mitsaina, Xenia Douka, and Ana Marusic
24 September @14:00
Room: TBD
The rapid growth of artificial intelligence (AI) in scientific research introduces new ethical challenges that existing governance structures are often unprepared to address. The BriGRETE project—Bridging the Gap: Research Ethics Training and Education —aims to strengthen research ethics education and institutional support mechanisms across Europe. This abstract presents the results of a comprehensive needs assessment carried out with Research Ethics Committees (RECs) and researchers in seven European countries, focusing on current ethics practices, knowledge gaps, and training priorities, particularly in relation to emerging areas such as AI. Using a mixed-methods approach, we collected qualitative data from 17 REC interviews and quantitative responses from 449 researchers. REC members identified common barriers such as high workload, insufficient resources, and the absence of tools to manage proposal reviews effectively. Most committees still rely on unsecured communication systems like email, and many lack the expertise to assess AI-driven research proposals confidently. These constraints hinder communication with researchers and reduce the overall efficiency and transparency of ethics oversight. There was a strong call for digital case-management tools and training on emerging ethical domains— particularly AI, data protection, and bioethics linked to advances in biomedical technologies and health research. Researchers similarly expressed concern about gaps in training and institutional support. While the majority recognised the importance of ethics in research, nearly one-third cited time constraints, lack of clear guidance, ethical grey areas, and insufficient access to training as major barriers. Notably, 43% of researchers identified the ethical implications of AI and machine learning as their most pressing training need—followed by topics like data protection and publication/authorship ethics. Both groups showed strong interest in additional training and more specifically in blended training formats that combine online courses with interactive workshops and emphasised the need for standardised and compulsory ethics curricula. These findings have direct implications for ethics education policy and practice. We outline how the BriGRETE project is responding by designing a modular curriculum tailored to researchers’ and RECs’ needs, including dedicated AI ethics modules, case-based learning materials, and digital case management tools to streamline ethics review. Our results also align with European frameworks such as the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity and the EU AI Act, highlighting the urgency of preparing the research community for forthcoming regulatory requirements. Ultimately, the study underscores an urgent need for enhanced research ethics education that is both comprehensive and adaptable. By improving the availability, relevance, and delivery of ethics training—especially in relation to emerging scientific areas and technologies such as AI —the BriGRETE project seeks to promote a culture of ethical research and empower both researchers and ethics reviewers to navigate complex ethical landscapes with confidence.
Registration is mandatory and limited to 50 participants. Hurry and register for the workshop using the form linked below.
WS9: Ethics at the Edge: Reimagining Integrity in Research Funding, Institutional Partnerships, and Academic Freedom; 24 September @14:00
Organised by Mina Lahlal and Tobias Kerzenmacher
24 September @14:00
Room: TBD
This workshop addresses the growing ethical and structural tensions surrounding how universities — particularly medical institutions — engage with research funding, institutional partnerships, and academic freedom. Central to the discussion is a recent case at the Medical University of Vienna, which accepted funding from a major firearms manufacturer — a company whose weapons are now present in active conflict zones, including the Russia-Ukraine war. While many leading institutions have implemented restrictions on funding from the tobacco and alcohol industries, few have developed consistent frameworks for evaluating other ethically problematic partnerships, such as those involving arms producers or extractive industries. This workshop asks: What principles should guide institutional decisions about funding sources, and what role should ethics committees and research integrity officers play in upholding these principles? The session also explores how decisions about funding intersect with academic freedom. Increasingly, researchers face not only constraints on the topics they may pursue, but also limitations on the criticisms they may express regarding their institutions’ own practices. Ethics committees — originally intended to protect human subjects and vulnerable communities — are at times repurposed as tools of institutional control, stifling critical discourse and reinforcing status quo agendas. Participants will engage with the following questions: How can universities develop transparent, participatory, and independent processes to assess and govern funding relationships? How should ethics committees balance the protection of research participants with safeguarding researchers’ rights to pursue politically sensitive or critical inquiries? How do internal institutional hierarchies shape whose concerns are legitimized — or dismissed — in funding decisions, research agenda-setting, and ethical deliberation? The workshop will engage participants in small group discussions using a case-based ethical matrix, complemented by international examples and institutional case studies. Discussion topics will include the strategic expansion of university partnerships into oil-rich regions, contrasted with the lack of coordinated institutional support for underserved communities — highlighting the disconnect between universities’ stated missions of “health and well-being” and their actual funding practices. Through structured exercises and collective analysis, the workshop invites participants to reimagine a university culture that is not only research-active, but also ethically consistent, transparent, and socially accountable.
Registration is mandatory and limited to 30 participants. Hurry and register for the workshop using the form linked below.