Advisory opinions

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.

  • Decision 2021-11
    The discussion about whether or not to use the term Armenian genocide is mainly a political-social controversy. Research Integrity Committees and the LOWI are not intended to settle such discussions in terms of research integrity. The petition is manifestly unfounded.
  • Advisory opinion 2021-10
    Case concerning the representation of conflicts of interest in a publication. No possible conflicts of interest that should have been mentioned in the scientific article. LOWI considers that the RIC was allowed to refuse a further document from the Complainant that was submitted 5 minutes before the end of the hearing.
  • Advisory opinion 2021-09
    The complaint the Petitioners lodged with the Research Integrity Committee (RIC) is not substantially different from the criticism they have already expressed in the scientific debate and which belongs there. The Petitioners use highly loaded terms such as data manufacturing and falsification, but in the opinion of the LOWI this is not the case.
  • Advisory opinion 2021-08
    This case concerns policy research. There is a penetrating attempt by a direct interested party to influence the results of an investigation. The LOWI qualifies the lack of transparency about this in the reporting by interested parties as questionable behaviour.
  • Advisory opinion 2021-07
    Publication in a legal journal. The scientists should have presented knowledge from another field more carefully, less one-sidedly and with more uncertainty. They should also not have diagnosed an individual. The rectification offered is inadequate. The LOWI advises to enter into consultation on appropriate recovery measures. One can think of withdrawing the article.
  • Advisory opinion 2021-06
    Violation of research integrity. See 2021-07.
  • Advisory opinion 2021-05
    This case concerns an unfinished dissertation. The fact that different doctoral candidates are awarded a PhD on the same subjects, or that a supervisor supervises different dissertations on the same subject, does not lead to questions about research integrity.
  • Advisory opinions 2021-03 and 04
    Insufficient transparency about the funding of research. The organization that commissioned the research must be distinguished from the five companies that funded the research and that had an independent interest in that research. The LOWI considers that not mentioning these financiers is culpably careless.
  • Advisory opinion 2021-02
    No plagiarism. The Interested Party has published about the same scientific problem, but not about the same scientific idea. The principle of hearing and rebuttal requires that parties are given the opportunity to respond to an expert report.
  • Advisory opinion 2021-01
    LOWI endorses an inadmissible declaration of a complaint. A scientist who accuses another scientist of violating a principle of research integrity can be expected to be able to clearly and concisely formulate which action he believes constitutes a violation and why.