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 opinion 2024-20Complaint about RIVM-fact sheet (national institute for public health). Standards from the code of conduct apply insofar as this can reasonably be required. The wording in the fact sheet is not carelessly.
- Advisory opinion 2024-19No plagiarism in application for a so called Veni grant. Scientists who face a complaint about research integrity may confide in their supervisor about this. The duty of confidentiality shall not prevent this.
- Decision 2024-18Petition that was filed too late is inadmissable. In addition the LOWI endorses the advisory opinion of the RIC of the TU Delft. The complaint concerns the appointment of a professor. The code of conduct does not apply to this.
- Advisory opinions 2024-15, 2024-16 and 2024-17PhD candidate (medicine) comes into conflict with his project group. Complaints were filed back and forth. The LOWI deems the complaint about the PhD candidate partially well-founded (regarding authorship) and qualifies this as ‘questionable research practice’. It does not qualify as ‘research misconduct’. Counter-complaints by the PhD candidate about the project group are unfounded. ...
- Advisory opinions 2024-12 and 2024-13Decisions of an FETC do not fall within the scope of the code of conduct. Although such decisions have consequences for scientific research, they are not themselves part of research practice. The administrative actions of the Dean in this case are also not covered by the code of conduct.
- Advisory opinion 2024-14Complaints about authorship and the course of events surrounding a PhD project are unfounded.
- Advisory opinion 2024-11Complaint about research on Sars-Cov-2 virus. LOWI deviates significantly from Research Integrity Committee advice because of additional information for the purpose of establishing facts. LOWI also differs from RIC in a more principled sense because LOWI qualifies several complaint components as professional differences of opinion that belong in scientific debate, not in a complaints procedure.
- Advisory opinion 2024-10Complaint has not been handled with the required care. The confidential advisors task is insufficiently separated from the KWI task (Research Integrity Committee). The principle of hearing both sides has wrongly not been applied. LOWI recommends reopening the investigation of the complaint and revising the complaints procedure.
- 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 2024-06This 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.