We are excited to announce that the NRIN Annual Symposium 2024, with the central theme Shaping a positive Research Culture at Higher Education Institutions: needs, opportunities and challenges, will take place on 25^th October 2024, at Geertekerk, Utrecht (see location here).

The Symposium will gather experts in the field to discuss practical approaches and interventions for catalysing effective transformations in shaping a positive research culture at higher education institutions.

The symposium is a free onsite event (registration required!) open to the Dutch and international academic and research communities. We welcome all those (including academic and non-academic staff, early and senior career researchers, and students) interested in research integrity, research ethics, and responsible research conduct to join us!

Contributions to the symposium are only possible by invitation from the NRIN Annual Symposium Organising Committee. We are not accepting abstract proposals.

All relevant information will be shared on the NRIN webpage, Newsletter and social media channels (X and LinkedIn).

Registration is closed! If you wish to attend the NRIN Symposium 2024, please send an email to the Organising Committee (info@nrin.nl).

How research culture shape responsible research practices in academia: current initiatives and future directions

In recent years, research culture has gained increasing awareness for its potential impact on both responsible research practices and the well-being of researchers. However, the definition of research culture often remains ambiguous and includes a variety of topics, making it challenging to understand its influence on research practices and the responsibilities of individual researchers, academic leaders, and institutions in fostering a responsible research culture. This presentation aims to shed light on these aspects by 1) discussing the importance of research culture in academia and 2) discussing how it may negatively influence research practices by emphasizing factors that contribute to a detrimental research culture, including the pressure to publish, funding constraints, poor leadership and lack of support.

The talk will then transition to an overview of various initiatives currently addressing research culture, using the culture change pyramid, to discuss the necessary progress for improvement. This includes 1) Policy initiatives: Strategies to support a responsible research environment; 2) Responsibilities: the roles of individual researchers, academic leaders, and institutions in cultivating a positive research environment; 3) Leadership: how leaders can foster supportive research culture through (super)vision, role modeling, and mentorship and 4) Communities: The importance of peer support networks and shared goals in creating a healthy research culture.

By addressing these themes, the presentation will highlight the critical need for a concerted effort to foster a responsible research culture in the future, ultimately contributing to the integrity and quality of research, as well as the well-being of the research community.

Joeri Tijdink is a Principal Investigator at Amsterdam UMC and affiliated with VU University in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. His main research focuses on research integrity, reproducibility, and mental well-being in academia and research culture. He is currently involved in several research projects, including the TIER2 project, which explores the future(s) of reproducibility. He is also the author of the book “The Happy Academic”; a book that provides guidance for early career researchers navigating academia’s torments (2023). Apart from his work as a researcher, he works as a clinical psychiatrist. Recently, his appointment as a member of the Young Academy from the Royal Society of Arts and Sciences in the Netherlands underscores his commitment to improving research quality and making academia a better place.

Changing reproducibility practices means changing research culture: Experiences from the Dutch Reproducibility Network (NLRN)

We are all taught that reproducibility is one of the cornerstones of scholarly research. Surprisingly, up until a decade ago, only limited attention was given to this practice.  Over the last decade, though, we have seen an increasing number of initiatives aimed at promoting the reproducibility of research processes and results. Many of these initiatives are bottom-up and scattered, others are organized on a national level and not yet grounded well in institutions. Summarizing the current state in terms of research culture: positive changes are taking place, but more work is needed to achieve true culture change.

The Dutch Reproducibility Network (NLRN) was officially launched in September 2023. It aims to coordinate, support and strengthen initiatives on reproducibility across all disciplines within scholarly research and education. We do so by connecting research performing institutions, local communities and external stakeholders with the goal to develop more targeted and efficient actions with a better evidence-base. Up until now, we have built this network with partners involved in higher education and research, Open Science Communities and other bottom-up initiatives and relevant other stakeholder like funders. In this presentation, we will touch upon the current state of NLRN, including the first activities that are being developed. We will discuss how all this relates to other networks and initiatives, such as the Recognition and Rewards Program, that also aim to contribute to a positive research culture.

Michiel de Boer is an Associate Professor in Epidemiology, who works as a methodologist at the Department of Primary and Long-term Care of the University Medical Center Groningen. He is co-founder and chair of the Dutch Reproducibility Network.

From surviving to thriving in academia

In today’s academic landscape, a set of overlapping crises underscores the significant inefficiencies and sustainability challenges within scientific practices. These crises span from the reliability of research findings through problems with the publication and peer review system to the precarious nature of researchers’ careers. To foster healthier research cultures in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), we need to recognize these issues as a complex web of interconnected challenges. I will illustrate some segments of this complexity through my research on the interplay between psychological and environmental factors in academia, with a specific focus on PhD candidates and the supervision system. By examining tangible examples, we can identify initiatives and best practices already implemented in some institutions. These include utilizing peer networks, setting up presentations and trainings about a range of topics such as mental health, (un)professional conduct, and workplace incivility, as well as transparent communication about norms and expectations. However, these localized efforts often address symptoms rather than the root causes. To improve research cultures in meaningful, sustainable ways, we need a systemic, holistic approach. Without a joint effort of coordination and system-level thinking, even the best initiatives can become merely reactive, combatting the symptoms instead of reimagining academia. Only through this collective effort and implementing a system perspective can we thrive, and not just survive.

Andrea Kis, a PhD candidate at TU Eindhoven, is passionate about understanding the experiences of researchers. Her work explores connections between psychological and environmental factors within academia, with a special focus on the sustainability of science and academic careers. Andrea obtained her MSc in Environmental Psychology at the University of Groningen, after being trained as a Behavioural Analyst, Information Scientist, and Designer. Her interdisciplinary approach and commitment to (social) sustainability are reflected in her active contributions to a range of projects within organizations such as FORRT, the Low Carbon Initiative and Social Safety groups, as well as science communication and policy advocacy connected to her own research.

Towards a Responsible Research Climate: Findings from Academic Researchers in Amsterdam

What is the influence of the academic research climate on research integrity? How is this research climate perceived across academic ranks and disciplinary fields? Is it a climate wherein researchers perceive high publication pressure? Do publication pressure and the research climate play a role in explaining research misbehaviour? And what is a responsible research climate?

Tamarinde Haven is an Assistant Professor in Research Methodology for the Social Behavioural Sciences at Tilburg University. She has a background in psychology, philosophy and epidemiology. Her PhD focused on fostering a responsible research climate for integrity. Tamarinde’s research interests include research integrity, methodology, open science, and qualitative and mixed methods research.

Improving the research climate in a decentralized organization: lessons from a University Medical center in turmoil

Science is a heterogeneous activity in terms of the topics, techniques, quality of our work, and how we have organized ourselves. The variation in topics and techniques is part of science, which also explains the variations in how we organize ourselves. In fact, science is a highly decentralized activity, which becomes a challenge when the quality of our work needs improvement. In my talk, I share the lessons from a University Medical center in turmoil. I will share how saw an opportunity to contribute to a better research climate through the Graduate School which oversees the PhD trajectories of 1700 PhD candidates.

Bob Siegerink is a clinical epidemiologist who runs the program Quality and Integrity of Biomedical Sciences, which combines research on research, research on policy and policy on research. He is also the coordinator of the LUMC Graduate School, which oversees the trajectories of PhD candidates at the LUMC.

He who pays the piper calls the tune. Is the purpose of research a matter of research integrity?

According to the 2018 Dutch Code for Research Integrity the purpose of research is not, in itself, a matter of research integrity. For example, the code explicitly did away with the notion of ’truth-finding’ as a core purpose of science, among others to make room for ‘practice-oriented research.’ In the same vein, research independence is required in the design, execution and reporting phases but not ‘in the choice of the research object and the research question’. This leaves ample room for others – for a large part funders – to determine the purpose of the research in question. This also leaves room for ‘mission creep’: can funders, or institutions determine – or set agendas on – what may and what not be researched?
Is the purpose of research a matter of research integrity and to what extent may research be instrumentalized for other purposes? In other words: can others than researchers – such as funders – have the final say over the choice of the research object and the research question? And should it be part of research integrity that the research question is (at least) guided by inherent research purposes such as ‘shared knowledge’ or ‘(some notion of) truth-seeking’ – something beyond the grip of any funder or institution?

Jonathan Soeharno is full professor of administration of justice and legal philosophy since 2012, a practicing lawyer (Of Counsel) and a deputy judge at the Court of Appeal ‘s-Hertogenbosch. He holds degrees in law, theology and philosophy is specialized in the fields of ethics and integrity.
Soeharno has specific expertise on the subject of scientific integrity. He was member and chair of the UvA Committee for Scientific Integrity from 2013 until 2022 (chair since 2017) and is part of the KNAW Evaluation Committee of the Dutch Scientific Integrity Code. Among others, he edited J.E. Soeharno & K.A. Algra (eds), Plagiarism in Academic Research and Education. Universities of The Netherlands 2021.
In addition, Soeharno has worked on ethics and integrity matters concerning judges, lawyers, banks (and bankers), insurers, accountants, bailiffs, public notaries, trustees in bankruptcy, estate planners and public prosecutors. He chairs the supervisory board of the Centre for Organisational Integrity (a non-profit).

Jeroen de Ridder is Professor of Philosophy at the Faculty of Humanities, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. He is also co-chair of VU center for Research Integrity and Open Science (RIOS). He specialises in political and social epistemology and philosophy of science.

Susan M.J. Berentsen (MSc) completed her Nursing degree at the HAN University of Applied Sciences (Nijmegen, The Netherlands) followed by a master’s in nursing and Midwifery at KU Leuven (Leuven, Belgium).  After five years of professional experience as a nurse (neurology) and a clinical trial assistant (neurosurgery and oncology) at the university hospital of Leuven, she started as a lecturer Nursing at the HAN University of Applied Sciences. She co-developed and coordinates research integrity (RI) training for researchers and research teams at Universities of Applied Sciences (UAS). She also received a Comenius grant to develop, evaluate and implement RI training for bachelor students at UAS. As a pioneer in supporting RI at UAS she won a SURF Research Support Champion Award. Since 2024, she also has been working as a policy officer at the HAN University of Applied Sciences focusing on implementing the duties of care from the Dutch Code of Conduct for Research Integrity, and more recently she started as a researcher at the department of Ethics, Law and Humanities at AmsterdamUMC (VUmc) contributing to the iRECS project.

Grace van Arkel PhD, LLM, is working as Policy Advisor for Research Integrity within the Integrity Office of the Delft University of Technology. Previously, from 1994 Grace was a labour lawyer. From 2005, she worked as an assistant professor on labour law at the Erasmus University Rotterdam. She also received her PhD degree from this university in 2007 on a comparative research in American and Dutch Dismissal Law. Subsequently, from 2011 to 2016, Grace became the official secretary of the Netherlands Board on Research Integrity (LOWI) and its representative to the European Network of Research Integrity Offices (ENRIO). From 2017 to 2019, Grace was part of an Horizon 2020 consortium (ENERI) coordinated from the Maastricht University, mapping the different national institutional structures for research integrity of the more than 20 member countries of ENRIO. In that capacity she, too, is a member of the Program Committee for the ENRIO Congress 2025.

Ana Barbosa Mendes is a PhD researcher at the Erasmus School of Philosophy. Her work focuses on methodological and ethical issues in participatory research, particularly Citizen Science. Besides working on her research, Ana actively advocates for the interests of PhDs relating to Open Science and Recognition & Rewards, as a board member of the Promovendi Netwerk Nederland.