Program NRIN Research Conference 2016

May 25, 2016
Last modified: June 28, 2017
Program NRIN Research Conference 2016

Fostering Responsible Research Practices

May 25th, 2016

Planetarium, Kromwijkdreef 11, 1108 JA Amsterdam
Download the Abstract book (updated May 18th)

Program (download pdf)

9.30 Registration
10.00 Opening by prof. dr. Lex Bouter
10.05 Launch of the call for the ZonMw Research program on Fostering Responsible Research Practices – Henk Smid (ZonMw) view PDF
10.15 Keynote: Is reproducibility the right paradigm for research reproducibility? – Prof. dr. Steven Goodman (Stanford, METRICS, Annals Internal Medicine) view PDF
10.50 Is Dutch science at greater risk? – Daniele Fanelli (METRICS) view PDF

11.10 Break

11.30 Integrity challenges in Ian McEwan’s Solar – on the use of novels in research and education concerning research integrity in the era of big science – Prof. dr. Hub Zwart (Radboud University Nijmegen) view PDF
11.50 Non-publication of clinical drug trials is common among phase 1 and single center trials – Results of an inception cohort study – Sander van den Bogert (Utrecht University) view PDF
12.10 Integrity and sustainability in the digital age: Storing, sharing, and documenting digital data by sociologists in the Netherlands – Beau Oldenburg (University of Groningen) view PDF

12.30 Lunch break

13.30 Parallel sessions A

A1: Reporting
A2: Methodology &amp scientometrics
A3: Policy &amp data management

15.00 Break

15.15 Parallel sessions B

B1: Scientific (mis)behaviour
B2: Fostering RI
B3: The RI concept

16.45 Plenary closing remarks by prof. dr. Steven Goodman

17.00 Reception

 A1 Reporting

A1.1  Do trialists hedge their claims sufficiently?: Towards automated detection of overstatement and spin. Gerben ter Riet, Sufia Amini, Lotty Hooft, Halil Kilicoglu view PDF

A1.2  Reporting Bias in observational epidemiologic research on phthalates. Gerard Swaen, Miriam Urlings, Maurice Zeegers view PDF

A1.3  Determinants of selective reporting: a review and content analysis of a random selection of the literature. Jenny T. van der Steen; Cornelis A. van den Bogert; Mirjam C. van Soest-Poortvliet; Soulmaz Fazelifarsani; René H.J. Otten; Gerben ter Riet; Lex M. Bouter view PDF

A1.4  Impact of reporting bias on estimates of test performance: an empirical study of uterine artery Doppler testing. Gerben ter Riet, Nicholas Bodmer, Janneke ’t Hooft, Khalid Khan view PDF

A1.5  The impact of 10 years of STARD on the reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies. Daniël A. Korevaar view PDF

A2 Methodology & Scientometrics

A2.1  Increasing Transparency through a Multiverse Analysis. Sara Steegen, Francis Tuerlinckx, Andrew Gelman, Wolf Vanpaemel view PDF

A2.2  Positive studies are cited twice as often as negative ones: a meta-analysis of citation bias. Bram Duyx, Miriam J.E. Urlings, Gerard Swaen, Lex M. Bouter, Maurice P. Zeegers view PDF

A2.3  The integrity of peer review. Jelte M. Wicherts view PDF

A2.4  Researcher’s Intuitions about Power in Psychological Research. Marjan Bakker, Chris H.J. Hartgerink, Jelte M. Wicherts, Han L.J. van der Maas view PDF

A2.5  Which factors drive citation? A Citation Network Analysis of trans fatty acid literature. Miriam J.E. Urlings, Bram Duyx, Gerard Swaen, Lex M. Bouter, Maurice P. Zeegers view PDF

A3 Policy & Data management

A3.1  Roles and responsibilities of a Medical Research Ethics Committee (MREC): A qualitative study investigating views and experiences of committee members. Benjamin Drukarch, Mariëlle Diepeveen, Jeroen J.G. Geurts, Wieke E. van der Borg, Guy A.M. Widdershoven view PDF

A3.2  Conflict of interests between publication embargo, patient safety and study progress: example case. Denhard J. de Smit, Martina C. Cornel

A3.3  Research Integrity Clinical Research Management System. Áine Honohan, Johanna G. van der Bom view PDF

A3.4  Biomedical Research Integrity in China-A Systematic Review of Empirical Research. Nannan Yi, Benoit Nemery de Bellevaux, Kris Dierickx

A3.5  Peer reporting of academic integrity violations. Gjalt de Graaf view PDF

B1 Scientific (mis)behaviour

B1.1  Storybook image of the scientist. Coosje Veldkamp

B1.2  Ranking importance of research misbehaviors. Lex Bouter, Nils Axelsen, Gerben ter Riet, Joeri Tijdink view PDF

B1.3  A qualitative investigation of “honest” retractions by researchers in the Netherlands and other countries. Mohammad Hosseini, Medard Hilhorst, Inez de Beaufort, Daniele Fanelli

B1.4  The personality of fraudsters; a cross sectional survey among biomedical scientists. Joeri Tijdink, Lex Bouter, Coosje Veldkamp, Peter van de Ven, Jelte Wicherts, Yvo Smulders view PDF

B2 Fostering RI

B2.1  Fostering a research integrity environment @ Ghent University. Stephanie van der Burght view PDF

B2.2  Promoting integrity in academia: experiences from an interactive policy process. Erwin van Rijswoud, Leo Huberts

B2.3  Using Moral Case Deliberation to foster responsible conduct of research. Laura A. Hartman, Bert Molewijk, Fenneke Blom, Lex M. Bouter, Guy A.M. Widdershoven view PDF

B2.4  Are the R.I.Ch. getting richer? Lessons learnt from the in-house development of a research integrity workshop. Dieter de Bruyn, Nele Bracke, Katrien de Gelder, Stefanie van der Burght view PDF

B3 The RI concept

B3.1  Deviance in science – Towards a Criminological Understanding. Marijke van Buggenhout, Jenneke Christiaens view PDF

B3.2  The Irreducible Plurality of the Value Basis of Research Integrity. Rik Peels, Jeroen de Ridder view PDF

B3.3  Value conflicts in academic teaching. Gjalt de Graaf view PDF

B3.4  Understanding the various meanings of ‘scientific integrity’. Serge Horbach view PDF

NRIN devotes a great deal of attention to the website’s content and would greatly appreciate your suggestions of documents or links you believe to belong on this website.

This selection is an incomplete convenience sample, and does not reflect NRIN’s vision or opinion. Including an item does not necessarily mean that we agree with the authors nor does it imply we think unmentioned items are of poorer quality.

Please report any suggestions, inaccuracies or nonfunctioning hyperlinks etc. that you discover. Thanks in advance!

Contact
Icon