Academic research emphasizes freedom and autonomy, free from external interference, and has always been accorded considerable respect and trust in our society.
This respect is based partly on the important value of academic research and partly on the high degree of self-regulation by the academic community regarding academic research practices, which earns societal trust. If academic research lacks self-discipline, and the objectivity, fairness, and reliability of research outcomes are questioned, requiring external scrutiny, it not only wastes social resources but also fails to gain public trust and thus research funding. Therefore, the academic community requires a high degree of self-discipline, and academic ethics are the self-regulatory norms for academic research within the academic community.
Researchers should uphold academic ethics and adhere to the conduct norms of the academic community to maintain mutual trust among academic researchers and trust from society.
Most advanced countries in the world have academic ethics regulations published by either the government or the academic community to guide researchers’ conduct. However, Taiwan had no such regulations until then. Therefore, after a period of discussion with academia, the NSC published the “Seven Explanations on Academic Ethics by the NSC,” the “Academic Ethics Regulations for Researchers,” and a revision of the existing “Guidelines for Handling and Reviewing Academic Ethics Cases.”
📃 Key Points of the NSC Academic Ethics Regulations
The “Seven Explanations on Academic Ethics by the NSC” elaborates on the NSC’s stance on academic ethics and defines the scope of the NSC’s public authority regarding the jurisdiction and disciplinary actions for academic misconduct. We understand and respect that different academic fields have different self-regulatory norms; therefore, we only provide a most basic set of regulations and encourage each academic community to establish further norms themselves.
The “Academic Ethics Regulations for Researchers” further specifies norms for various behaviors during the academic research process (including research conceptualization, execution, and presentation of results):
- Positive Declarations: Expected attitudes and behaviors of scholars (basic attitudes of researchers, collection and analysis of research data, complete preservation of research records for review, public sharing of research data and results, attribution of others’ contributions, co-authorship, peer review confidentiality, conflict of interest avoidance and disclosure, reporting academic misconduct) and the appropriate handling attitudes and mechanisms of research institutions.
- Explicitly Listed Improper Behaviors: Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, and improper behaviors related to research output publication and author definition, self-plagiarism, multiple submissions, and a discussion of different forms thereof.
In many past cases, scholars often argued that they were unaware certain behaviors were unacceptable. Indeed, some norms are passed down orally within the academic community and are not explicitly written, nor are they systematically taught during a scholar’s training.
We hope that after the promulgation of these regulations, scholars will have clear guidelines to follow. When academic ethics are implemented into concrete actions, it is still inevitable that there will be gray areas that are difficult to judge.
For example: a thesis completely ghostwritten by someone not involved in the research is absolutely improper, but asking a friend, colleague, or professional editor to help revise and polish a manuscript is a common and legitimate practice.
⚖️ Criteria for Determination and Past Cases
From improper to legitimate, there are various behaviors between these two extremes, and it is difficult to judge which are permissible and which should be disciplined. Academic research values reputation most highly; simple oversight should not be arbitrarily deemed academic misconduct that destroys a scholar’s lifelong reputation. Therefore, when reviewing cases of academic misconduct, the Council has always proceeded cautiously, often reaching conclusions after lengthy discussions.
After careful deliberation, we have adopted “misleading and severe” as the criteria for determining academic misconduct, facilitating the judgment of such cases.
Various behaviors in research work should be regulated, such as workplace safety, treatment of experimental animals, respect for research subjects and confidentiality of personal data, sexual harassment, teacher-student relationships, copyright, use of funds, etc., each with its own regulations (e.g., Labor Safety and Health Act, Animal Protection Act, Personal Data Protection Act, Human Research Act, Medical Care Act, Human Biobank Management Act, Sexual Harassment Prevention Act, Teachers Act, Copyright Act, Accounting Act, Criminal Code, etc.) and respective competent authorities.
Here, we only establish norms for what are generally considered core academic ethical behaviors.
According to the Council’s statistics, from 1999 to 2012, the Council handled a total of 98 academic ethics cases, of which 7 were fabrication cases, and the vast majority were plagiarism and inadequate citation. Disciplinary actions ranged from written warnings to suspension for 1-10 years, and one case even resulted in lifetime suspension. After the Council explicitly clarified academic ethics regulations, we hope that the academic community can avoid improper research conduct, reduce the occurrence of academic misconduct cases, and positively enhance the academic research climate.
❌ Supplementary Files (Delisted)
The following links were once academic ethics-related documents published by the National Science Council, but have since been delisted and disappeared:
- NSC Seven Explanations on Academic Ethics.doc / .odt / .pdf
- Academic Ethics Regulations for Researchers.doc / .odt / .pdf
- National Science Council Executive Yuan Guidelines for Handling and Reviewing Academic Ethics Cases.doc / .odt / .pdf
[Cancellation Announcement] NSC Publishes Academic Ethics Regulations - Ministry of Science and Technology (Original URL: https://www.most.gov.tw/folksonomy/detail/cc4d3853-ef32-4d39-89d8-27bb752e247d)