Literature DB >> 33905410

Incorporating equity, diversity, and inclusiveness into the Hong Kong Principles.

David Moher1,2, Lex Bouter3,4, Nicole Foeger5, Ulrich Dirnagl6.   

Abstract

In this response to Labib and Evans, authors of the Hong Kong Principles look forward to collaborating with those from the broad research integrity community to ensure that issues of equity, diversity and inclusion will become part of the ecosystem of research integrity.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 33905410      PMCID: PMC8078783          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001140

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS Biol        ISSN: 1544-9173            Impact factor:   8.029


We thank Ms. Labib and Dr. Evans for their work on the Hong Kong Principles (HKPs) [1]. Your letter raises important points and gives us an opportunity to respond and clarify our perspective. As you indicate in your letter, equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) are important topics that require attention in the assessment of researchers. We did not address them specifically in the HKPs because our main focus was on rewarding responsible research practices that improve the transparency and validity of research. As a clarification (and not to be interpreted as defensive on our part), EDI also wasn’t mentioned prominently in our breakout discussions with more than 100 participants of the 6th World Conference on Research Integrity, where the draft HKPs were discussed and finalized. In our paper [2], Principle 5 (recognize essential other tasks like peer review and mentoring) provides a useful example that illustrates that the essence of the Labib and Evans comments about EDI are in alignment with our views—“Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia, has some exciting initiatives in their new academic promotion policy, which includes five pillars, one of which is in leadership and citizenship. Here, researchers can show their alignment with the university’s values and broader contribution to the university and its community [87]. Since this policy was introduced, it has been reported that the number of promotion applications increased by 50%, and the number of women promoted has also increased [88]”. We think there will be an opportunity to more forcefully address EDI in the envisioned Cape Town Statement on Fostering Research Integrity through equity, fairness, and diversity (programmed as a focus track on the 7th World Conference on Research Integrity, Cape Town, South Africa, 2022). We can imagine that the Cape Town Statement will demand fostering EDI in research, including in the assessment of researchers for hiring, promotion, or tenure. We would see this as an update of the HKPs. We are pleased that the HKPs has initiated discussion on EDI as part of the process of assessing researchers for hiring, promotion, and tenure. We look forward to collaborating with Labib and Evans and many others from the broad research integrity community to ensure that EDI will become part of the ecosystem of research integrity.
  1 in total

1.  The Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers: Fostering research integrity.

Authors:  David Moher; Lex Bouter; Sabine Kleinert; Paul Glasziou; Mai Har Sham; Virginia Barbour; Anne-Marie Coriat; Nicole Foeger; Ulrich Dirnagl
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2020-07-16       Impact factor: 8.029

  1 in total
  1 in total

1.  Stakeholders' views on an institutional dashboard with metrics for responsible research.

Authors:  Tamarinde L Haven; Martin R Holst; Daniel Strech
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-06-24       Impact factor: 3.752

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.