Below you can read the text of the Code of Practice for Researchers of DSiN. This text is also available for download as a .pdf (see attachments). This text comes with several forms (DSiN ethical review self-assessment form; DSiN ethical review form; sample DSiN permission forms and guidance). You can also download these forms separately.
Disability Studies in Nederland:
Code of Practice for Researchers
This Code should be read and followed by all researchers working for or with Disability Studies in Nederland.
Researchers may also need to regard other Codes of Practice, for example those issued by a university or organisation with which they are also affiliated, or by professional organisations that they are members of.
1. Principles and Application
- DSiN expects all research carried out under its auspices, or by its employees or contractors, to adhere to the highest ethical standards.
- This Code of Practice applies to all DSiN employees, contractors, and external research collaborators working on projects affiliated with DSiN.
- This Code will be reviewed annually.
- For all research projects, the project leader / principal researcher is accountable for ensuring that all researchers and external research collaborators are aware of the Code of Practice and adhere to its standards and guidelines.
- There are multiple areas of accountability that each researcher must have regard for. These are:
a) The ethical basis of the research and research design
b) Safety of all involved in research
c) Sound financial management of research, including accountability to DSiN and to any additional public or private funders
d) Sound research project management, including delivering scheduled outcomes in a timely fashion
e) Management, use and security of research data in a way that meets the requirements of relevant Dutch and EU laws concerning the management of personal information
f) Ensuring that research results are disseminated in a timely way, and that accessible summaries are made available to research participants and disabled people and others who may benefit from the research
g) Maintaining adequate research records and providing these to DSiN as required
h) Ensuring that research participants give their consent without coercion or pressure, are informed of any risks, and are aware of the broad purpose of the research project and its funders
i) Taking account of and minimising risks to research participants and researchers
j) Considering how research derives from and affects the work of others, and respecting the rights and reputation of others
- When peer reviewing research proposals or results (including manuscripts submitted for publication), researchers must protect the confidentiality of information provided, disclose any conflicts of interest and any areas of limited competence, and must not misuse or misappropriate the content of the material being reviewed.
Researchers must be honest and lawful in respect of their actions relating to research and in response to the actions of other research workers. This applies to the whole range of research activity, outputs and deliverables, including applying for funding, generating and analysing data, publishing results, choice of research methods and acknowledging the direct and indirect contribution of colleagues, collaborators and others.
3. Research data
- Research workers must keep clear and accurate records of the research procedures they followed and the results obtained, including interim results.
- Research data must be recorded in a durable and auditable form, with appropriate references so that it can readily be recovered. Unless directed to do otherwise, data about individuals should always guard anonymity.
- Data should be stored in a secured form. If it is on a personal computer, the computer should be protected by a password. If it is stored on removable media, such as an external hard drive, USB stick, or CD, the removable media should be kept secure.
- All publications should acknowledge the contributions of everyone who has conceived, executed or interpreted at least part of the research reflected in the publication.
- Usually, this will mean being listed as a co-author of the research. Being listed as a co-author requires consenting to the content of the publication.
- If a contribution was too minor to warrant being listed as a co-author, it should nonetheless be acknowledged in the publication or in a list of acknowledgements. Funders, organisations, archives, and research sites should also always be included in acknowledgements, unless this would compromise confidentiality of research participants.
5. Ethical review
- All DSiN research projects must adhere to the Ethical Review procedure outlined in this section.
- First, the project leader / principal researcher should conduct an Ethical Review self-assessment using the form provided (see DSiN Ethical Review Self-Assessment Form)
- This form must be placed on file with DSiN.
- If this form indicates that further review is needed, the research project plan and associated documents must be sent to the DSiN Ethical Review Committee for approval.
- The result of this process must be placed on file with DSiN.
- DSiN will form an Ethical Review Committee, made up of two DSiN staff plus a third non-DSiN academic who will be consulted if the internal committee cannot agree or feels that additional insight is required.
- If the Ethical Review Committee requests changes in the research design, permissions forms or procedures, or other aspects of the research, these must be followed by the researcher(s).
6. Additional requirements
- Project leaders / principal researchers must ensure that they are familiar with any additional rules and requirements of research funders or partners, and that these are followed.
- Should a researcher become aware of any situation that could negatively impact the reputation of DSiN, any form of misuse or loss of finances or equipment, or any potential or actual harm to research participants (including harm that is not connected to the research project), this must be reported to DSiN immediately.
7. Research misconduct
- Not complying with this Code of Practice will be defined as research misconduct, as will the following actions:
a) Fabrication of data or permissions
b) Falsification of data or deceptive manipulation of research results
c) Plagiarism in any form
d) Misrepresentation of the origin of ideas, data, or authorship
e) Failure to declare financial or other material interests by researchers or funders
f) Breach of any duty of care to co-researchers or research participants, including, but not limited to, placing others at risk of harm, and unauthorized disclosure of personal information or the identity of individuals
g) Failing to obtain informed consent from research participants
h) Unauthorised use of information obtained confidentially
i) Failure to disclose an actual or potential conflict of interest that could bring DSiN or a research partner into disrepute or compromise research integrity
j) Inciting others to commit research misconduct
k) Failure to declare, when known, that a research partner or collaborator has committed research misconduct or is under investigation for misconduct
l) Fraud, including research fraud and financial fraud
- Because an accusation of research misconduct is a serious matter (and if false, could be considered defamation), any allegations of research misconduct should be made confidentially and directly to the current Director of DSiN only. The Director will be responsible for investigating the allegation and determining what measures should be taken if research misconduct is found to have occurred.
8. Intellectual property
- When working on any project managed, carried out or funded by DSiN, researchers need to discuss the issue of intellectual property with DSiN and come to an agreement before proceeding.
- It is our intention that unless otherwise prohibited (for example by a separate agreement with a funding agency or institution), findings and/or (versions of) final outputs from all research in which DSiN is involved will be available via an open source archive managed by DSiN. Working links to an external open source archive are also acceptable.
DS-researchers make their own informed consent form, which suits best their specific needs. See the attachments for several sample forms.