Research integrity

1. Integrity
2. Rigour
3. Transparency
4. Fairness
5. Respect
6. Recognition
7. Accountability
8. Promotion

It represents the core behaviours that characterise responsible conduct of research and outlines the principles everyone undertaking research are expected to uphold at all times. It also has specific responsibilities for institutions and individual researchers. The University has produced a Research Code of Conduct Policy and related procedures to interpret the Code to a UniSQ context.

Potential breaches of the Research Code are taken seriously and the process for reporting, assessing and investigating breaches is outlines in the University's Research Code of Conduct Management of Potential Breaches Procedure. 

UniSQ recognises the need for researchers to be informed on issues relating to research integrity and the conduct of responsible research, including research ethics matters. These issues are vital to the future of UniSQ's research outcomes and success.  

• Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (2018)
• Singapore Statement on Research Integrity (2010)
• Defence Export Controls
• Authorship
• University's ReDTrain program - events calendar
• University of Southern Queensland Research Integrity training module (Opendesk)

Peer Review plays an important role in helping to validate research, establish methods by which it can be evaluated, and increase networking possibilities among researchers (Elsevier, 2016). There are many types of Peer Review, with the single blind review method being the most traditional and common method used for publication purposes.  

At UniSQ, we encourage peer review in all aspects of teaching and research, including ethics applications, grant Applications and research outputs.  

UniSQ Statement on Peer Review  

UniSQ recognises the importance of peer review and is committed to encouraging and supporting UniSQ Research Workers to participate in the process. That encouragement extends to participation as an expert or generalist reviewer both within the University and to Australian and international peer review processes. UniSQ expects Research Workers to engage with the process by having their work peer reviewed. This includes ensuring that all applications submitted for research ethics approval, funding and publication to have undergone a peer review process prior to submission.  

Peer review takes on many forms but, requires both experts in areas of research and generalist readers (in associated or more generalised fields of research) to provide clear, unbiased, timely and considered review of material submitted for publication, grants, promotion and other forms of public release. Normally a peer review process requires at least three reviewers. Peer reviewers are often asked to comment on the academic quality, relevance, coherence and financial viability of applications and/or be able to rank the review material against selection criteria.  

UniSQ recognises that one important aspect of peer review is the discovery of apparent deviations from the principles of the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (2018). Examples include double publication, incorrect and misleading statements, fabrication, plagiarism and fraud. Where a potential breach of the Research Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research is raised it is handled in accordance with the Research Code of Conduct: Management of Potential Breaches Procedure.  

Responsibilities of UniSQ Research Workers  

UniSQ encourages all UniSQ Research Workers to participate in, and support, the peer review process. In doing so, those who agree to act as peer reviews must:  

• Be fair and timely in their review;
• Act in confidence and not disclose the content or outcome of any process (to those other than the author/s) in which they are involved;
• Ensure they are informed about, and comply with the relevant criteria;
• Declare all conflicts of interest, including perceived conflicts of interest, which may influence the peer review process;
• Give proper consideration to research that challenges or changes accepted ways or thinking; 
• Not take undue or calculated advantage of knowledge obtained during the process; and
• Be aware of their obligations under various grant Funding Agreements as to the requirement to undertake peer review when requested by Funding Body (for example, NHMRC, ARC).  

Taking into consideration the field of research and the number of recognised experts within the field, reviews should not agree to participate in specialist peer review outside their area or level of expertise. In instances where this does occur, UniSQ Research Workers should declare their limitations. When asked to participate as a generalist reader, UniSQ Research Workers should be aware that they need a general level of awareness and understanding of the field involved.  

UniSQ encourages and expects that HDR supervisors assist their students (as an essential part of research training) in developing the skills and responsibilities involved in peer reviewing and appreciate their obligation to participate in this scholarly activity.  

Record of Peer Review  

Research workers have a responsibility to engage with the Peer Review process at the University, and particularly prior to the submission of applications for funding, ethical review, and publication.  

A record of Peer Review engagement may be captured through email, letters or using the UniSQ Peer Review Checklist (DOC 539KB). A copy should also be retained for their own record.  

The use of this checklist will ensures that your record of Peer Review includes:

• anticipated title of the research project
• acknowledgement of the anticipated benefits and risks of the research and whether these have been addressed
• the research questions and/or hypotheses are appropriate
• the research design and methods are appropriate to achieve the research aims
• the research team and supervisors are appropriate qualified, competent and experienced.  

The University is committed to maintaining the highest standard of integrity in research, as outlined in the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research and the Research Code of Conduct Policy.  

Authorship must only recognise a significant intellectual or scholarly contribution to a Research Output. For a person to claim, demand, or accept authorship without having made a significant intellectual or scholarly contribution is a breach of the Research Code.  

An author is responsible for the integrity and accurate reporting of at least their significant intellectual or scholarly contribution to the research.

The University considers that authorship:  

• must be an honest reflection of contribution to research
• should be assigned fairly and consistently
• should be communicated clearly and transparently between contributors to the research
• should be approached with a generosity of spirit while remaining true to the policy requirements
• should acknowledge contributions appropriately.  

A research worker who qualifies as an author must not be included or excluded for authorship without written agreement as described in the Authorship Procedure.  

Record of authorship  

Research workers have a responsibility to discuss authorship between potential co-authors and contributors to Research Outputs at the beginning of the research and as soon as collaborative circumstances or the research changes.  

A record of authorship agreement is to include, but is not limited to:

• anticipated title of the scholarly work
• outlet (e.g. journal name, publisher, conference or other medium)
• anticipated date of submission to the outlet
• name and order or authors, author role and contribution to the overall Research Output. 

Research workers are encouraged to use the Authorship agreement (DOC 75KB) and retain a copy for their own record. The record of authorship agreement may also be informally captured through email or letters.  

Policy and procedure  

UniSQ has developed an Authorship Procedure that align with the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (and Authorship guide).  

The University is subject to a number of Acts and Regulations which contain trade controls:   

• Autonomous Sanctions Act 2011 (Cth)
• Customs Act 1901 (Cth)
• Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 (Cth)
• Defence Trade Controls Act 2012 (Cth)
• Weapons of Mass Destruction (Prevention of Proliferation) Act 1995 (Cth)  
• Export Administration Regulations (EAR) USA
• International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) USA

Autonomous Sanctions  

Australian sanction laws implement United Nations Security Council (UNSC) sanctions regimes and Australian autonomous sanctions regimes.

Autonomous sanctions may impact on the following activities at UniSQ:  

The University engages with supervisors to ensure that sanctions are considered and uses a form to assist with the risk assessment (Sanctions Compliance Form, DOC 1.3MB)  

Defence Export Controls  

Australia’s Defence Export Control Office (DECO) is responsible to the Minister of Defence for regulating the export, transfer and brokering of defence and strategic goods and technologies to any place outside of Australia.  

The Customs Act 1901 regulates the tangible export of goods or technology and the Defence Trade Controls Act (Cwth) 2012 (the Act) controls the intangible export, brokering and publication of technologies. The Defence Trade Controls Amendment Bill was passed by Parliament and has been in affect from 1 April 2016.  

Defence and Strategic Goods List  

If your research plans or data will be shared or sent overseas, or used in an overseas conference and are included in the Defence andStrategic Good list (DSGL), you may require a permit to be authorised by the Defence Export Control Office (DECO). The DSGL is comprised of two parts:  

Goods and technology included in the DSGL are restricted under the Weapons of Mass Destruction (Prevention and Proliferation) Act 1995 and the Customs Act 1901 and may not be exported from Australia unless a licence or permission has been granted by the Minister for Defence.  

Online DSGL Tool  

The DSGL online tool will help you identify if your research materials or activities will require a permit. The tool consists of two parts, the Activity Questionnaire and the DSGL Search Tool.  

A permit from Defence Export Controls Office (DECO) is only required when an export, supply, brokering or publishing activity is controlled and the goods, software or technology are listed in the DSGL. It is recommended that if you are new to export controls and are unsure if your activity will be controlled, you should complete the Activity Questionnaire first.  

If after using the Online DSGL Tool, you are unable to determine if your item is controlled in the DSGL, you will need to submit an application to DECO for assessment. The Office of Research will work with you in submitting your application to ensure you are registered and any required licences are obtained. It is important to note that it is the individual, not the institution, who is accountable under the Act for non-compliance.  

Applications can take up to 15 working days to assess with more complex applications taking considerably longer. It is important to include this process early in your research planning.  

Quick reference tools and resources  

ITAR/EAR  

Export Administration Regulations (EAR) USA or International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) USA may apply to equipment or software used at UniSQ.  

The Department of Defence outlines the requirements around these Regulations:  

Further information  

For enquiries please contact DefenceExport Controls or our Research Integrity Office.