GCRI · Science and methods
Research integrity
Research integrity makes evidence worth using: honest methods, independent review, results reported whether they please anyone or not, errors corrected in the open. The Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI) sets out its review roles, reproducibility support, negative results and corrections. The rules bind every funder, sponsor, host and participant. No support buys a finding. Part of science and methods.
01Contents
Research integrity in six parts.
In this dossier6 parts
- 01Review rolesWho does what before a result is released
- 02Codes followedThe integrity codes the work is held to, and what each adds
- 03Integrity in the reportsWhat every edition carries so that its integrity can be checked
- 04Four commitmentsWhat integrity requires in practice
- 05IndependenceNo one can buy a finding
- 06SourcesWhere this page’s references lead
02Review roles
Who does what before a result is released.
Each role is distinct, and one person does not hold two roles on the same work where that would compromise independence.
| Role | Responsibility | Safeguard |
|---|---|---|
| Authors | Design the study, analyse data, report results and limitations | Contributions recorded; authorship follows contribution |
| Domain reviewers | Check methods, data and conclusions | Declared conflicts; a conflicted reviewer does not sign acceptance |
| Editorial review | Check clarity, evidence labels, rights and disclosures | Release follows review, not publicity deadlines |
| Source owners | Confirm the use of their data | Original source authority is retained |
03Codes followed
The integrity codes the work is held to, and what each adds.
| Code | Body and date | What it adds |
|---|---|---|
| The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, revised edition | ALLEA, 2023 | Reliability, honesty, respect and accountability, with updated attention to data practices, new technologies and research culture |
| Singapore Statement on Research Integrity | World Conferences on Research Integrity, 2010 | Fourteen responsibilities shared by researchers and institutions |
| Core practices and retraction guidelines | Committee on Publication Ethics | How journals and publishers handle misconduct, corrections and retractions |
| Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers | Moher and others, 2020 | Rewarding responsible practice, open sharing and complete reporting over volume of output |
| CRediT contributor roles | ANSI/NISO Z39.104-2022 | Fourteen named roles so that authorship records who did what |
| Recommendation on Open Science | UNESCO, 2021 | Openness as a default, with protections for sensitive and Indigenous knowledge |
04Integrity in the reports
What every edition carries so that its integrity can be checked.
Every edition designed for Reports carries its contributor roles, its funding and review disclosures, and its correction history. Verification evidence would follow NS-11 of the proposed Nexus Standards. Concerns can be raised by anyone; reviewers and whistle-blowers are protected from retaliation, and the person handling a concern has no part in the work concerned.
05Four commitments
What integrity requires in practice.
- 01
Reproducibility
Data, code and parameters are recorded so that results can be repeated, within the rights of each source.
- 02
Negative results
Null and negative findings are published. Research terms keep negative findings and independent scrutiny possible.
- 03
Disclosure
Funding, review and conflicts are disclosed with each publication.
- 04
Corrections
Anyone can challenge a public finding. A correction creates a new recorded version, never a silent edit, as set out under corrections and concerns.
06Independence
No one can buy a finding.
No funding, sponsorship, membership or hosting buys a finding, a ranking, a hidden limitation or influence over a conclusion. Conflicts are handled under independence and conflicts. Editorial standards are under scientific and editorial integrity. Lab practice is at Labs research integrity.
Integrity concerns can be raised by anyone, without membership, at the integrity concern form.
07Sources
Where this page’s references lead.
The bodies and documents this page is read against. Status and editions change; each link goes to the issuing body.
- The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, revised edition (ALLEA, 2023)
- Singapore Statement on Research Integrity (World Conferences on Research Integrity, 2010)
- COPE Core Practices (Committee on Publication Ethics)
- COPE Retraction guidelines (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2019)
- Moher and others, The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: fostering research integrity, PLOS Biology 18 (2020)
- CRediT contributor roles taxonomy, ANSI/NISO Z39.104-2022 (NISO, 2022)
- UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science (UNESCO, 2021)
- NS-11, Verification and monitoring, a proposed standard
08Questions
Questions and answers.
How do I raise a concern about research misconduct?
Write to the integrity concern form with the publication or project and the facts you can share. The concern is reviewed by someone not involved in the work, and the acknowledgement gives a reference.
Are AI tools allowed in GCRI research?
Yes, when their use is disclosed and validated. AI-drafted text or analysis is not reviewed work until qualified reviewers have checked it, and authors remain responsible.
Does GCRI publish results that funders dislike?
Yes. Findings are accepted on method, funding is disclosed and no support buys the suppression of a result or a limitation.
What happens to a retracted result?
The record stays visible with a clear notice of retraction and the reason, so that readers who cited it can see what changed.
Who reviews research involving people?
Studies involving human participants follow the ethics review required by the institutions and jurisdictions involved, with consent and data protection set out before work begins.
ReportsContribute
Contribute evidence from this page.
Reports is the Consortium’s quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.
GCRI
- EmailGateway GW-GCRISend it from this pageEvidence, a correction, a case, a method, a review, a translation or profile input. It arrives tagged with this page, so the editor who owns it receives it.
- ZenodoOpen depositDeposit it and submit to the communityPublish your own record on Zenodo with your ORCID iD, then submit it to the Reports community there. Curators review it; the DOI stays yours.
- ReportsGCRISee every way to contributeThe contribution types, how each is reviewed, what credit you receive, the licence and what is never accepted.
Never send personal data, sensitive infrastructure detail or anything you have no right to share. A contribution is reviewed before use; sending it confers no authorship or editorial rights, and sponsorship never buys a finding.
The Global Centre for Risk and Innovation
Bring a method, a dataset or a question.
Information and enquiries are open today. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.
Legal
Legal documents.
Maps, data and figures on this site are shown for context and general information. They are not advice, forecasts or warnings; the limits of the information are set out in the Disclaimers and Data Notices.