top of page
Aurelia Jellyfish

OCEANIC NETWORKS

This work package will develop an historical epistemology of ocean science by way of network analysis of the networks of actors and institutions which were involved in the development of the field in the past three decades as well as a historiography of the field, thereby connecting epistemic and organisational trends. We will combine term maps and collaboration and publication analysis to understand which actors (both individuals and institutes) are most prominent, or have been most prominent, in key areas of ocean science. The second part of the WP will provide statistical input to support and enhance the fieldwork at marine institutes in WP4, and build a bridge between large scale quantitative analysis and ethnographic fieldwork.

OPTIMIZING THE RESPONSIBLE RESEARCHER: TOWARDS FAIR AND CONSTRUCTIVE ACADEMIC ADVANCEMENT (2017-2019)

Funded through the ZonMw Fostering Responsible Research Practices program.

​

The project 'Optimizing the responsible researcher: towards fair and constructive academic advancement' aims to describe the optimal profile of researchers in terms of their propensity to foster responsible conduct in research. This profile will be compared with existing academic incentive and reward systems.

Recent years have seen high-profile initiatives to improve current criteria for assessing academic achievements (e.g., the Leiden Manifesto, the Metric Tide, Science in Transition, DORA, METRICS, Reward Alliance). Some institutions are implementing improved and innovative incentive and reward systems. It is yet unknown whether these systems will counter unintended effects of evaluation systems and unwarranted uses of performance metrics. Plus, help to foster responsible conduct of research by selecting the scientists with a multidimensional profile (i.e., more than a good publication and citation record) and a skill-set that enables them to undertake and supervise both innovative and societally relevant research.

The project will result in an evidence-based framework and a set of concrete policy recommendations for designing (or adapting) academic reward systems aimed at fostering excellent, socially responsible research.

​

Team members

​

  • Sarah de Rijcke (Principal investigator, CWTS)

  • Joeri Tijdink (postdoc, VUmc)

  • Govert Valkenburg (postdoc, CWTS)

  • Paul Wouters (CWTS)

  • James Wilsdon (Sheffield)

  • Frank Miedema (UMC Utrecht, Science in Transition)

  • Lex Bouter (Project adviser, VUmc).

​

About ZonMw FPPR

​

ZonMw has launched a new programme called 'Fostering Responsible Research Practices' (FRRP), to encourage quality, integrity, efficiency and positive social impact in scientific and academic research. FRRP aims to build bridges between science, professional practice and policy by promoting research which is relevant, robust and transparent. It will develop and disseminate useful know-how to improve research-related practices – not just for front-line scientists and institutions, but also for policymakers, financiers and evaluators.

PRINTEGER

Promoting Integrity as an Integral Dimension of Excellence in Research (PRINTEGER) (Funded by the EC through a H2020 COST Action)

Coordinators: Hub Zwart and Willem Halffman (Radboud University Nijmegen)
Consortium partners: Free University Brussels, the University of Tartu (Estonia), Oslo and Akershus University College, Leiden University, and the Universities of Bonn, Bristol, and Trento
SES team members: Thed van Leeuwen, Paul Wouters, Sarah de Rijcke
 
The goal of the project is to encourage a research culture that treats integrity as an integral part of doing research, instead of an externally driven steering mechanism. In order to stimulate integrity and responsible research, new forms of governance are needed that are firmly grounded in and informed by research practice. SES contributes with

a) a bibliometric analysis of ‘traces of fraud’ (e.g. retracted articles, manipulative editorials, non-existent authors and papers, fake journals, bogus conferences, non-existent universities), against the background of general shifts in publication patterns);


b) Two in-depth cases studies of research misconduct, not the evident or spectacular, but more particularly reflecting dilemmas and conflicts that occur in grey areas;

c) Task leadership on formulation of Advice for research support organisations, including on IT tools. This task will draw conclusions from the research on the operation of the research system, specifically publication infrastructures;

d) The organisation of local advisory panels consisting of five to ten key stakeholders of the project: policy makers, research leaders or managers, support organisations, early career scientists.

bottom of page