This is a list of short summaries of advisory opinions. The list also includes decisions. In these cases, LOWI has declared the petition inadmissible. It has therefore not examined the substance of the petition and has not issued an advisory opinion.
By placing keywords in the search bar (click on the magnifying glass in the top right corner) you can search specifically within the advice.
The full text of the advisory opinion is only available in Dutch. If you want to read the full text in English, you can use the Dutch text for translation purposes.
- Advisory opinions 2024-08 and 2024-09Report commissioned by a commercial party is in accordance with standards of research integrity. Complaints procedure is not the right means for criticism on scientific quality. No compelling reasons to hear the parties separately. The parties were wrongly not given the opportunity to respond to the report of the hearing at which they were absent.
- Advisory opinion 2024-07VU holds no academic responsibility for the actions of the Interested Party. The KNAW does. Complaint is inadmissible. (see also 2024-08 and -09)
- Advisory opinion 2024-06This case seems to mainly revolve around a dispute between directors of a company. This should not be settled in terms of research integrity. Research Integrity Committees and LOWI are not authorized to judge intellectual property rights.
- Advisory opinion 2024-07VU bears no academic responsibility for the actions of the Interested Party. The KNAW does. Complaint is inadmissible. (see also 2024-08 and -09)
- Advisory opinion 2024-05Co-PI's name has been wrongly removed from grant application. No plagiarism. LOWI qualifies the violations of standards as questionable research practice for all defendants. Also for the associate professors who did not want to participate in the LOWI procedure as an interested party.
- Advisory opinion 2024-04Publication restrictions imposed on the Petitioner do not lead to the conclusion that standard 58 of the Code of Conduct has been violated (do not improperly delay or impede the work of other researchers). LOWI advises on how to proceed and on the institution's duty of care.
- Advisory opinion 2024-03Former co-supervisor complains that external PhD candidate has not made sufficient reference in his dissertation to, among other things, the origin of texts and to previously published own work. The complaints are unfounded except for one part: a reference is missing in a thesis chapter. However, this is just a minor shortcoming.
- Advisory opinion 2024-02Interpretation of the NCCRI 2018. A complaints procedure only applies to scientific and scholarly research by students when this results in (scientific) publications. A published (master) thesis is not regarded as such a publication.
- Advisory opinion 2024-01The complainant's lawyer violated the duty of confidentiality. In this case, the decision of the Research Integrity Committee to stop the handling of the complaint was not a proportionate response to this violation given its nature and limited seriousness.
- Advisory opinion 2023-20Complaint has not been dealt with diligently since it was not forwarded to the RIC. LOWI advises to create a mailbox specially intended for the RIC and to publish the e-mail address on the website of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW).