Research Integrity Matters - Peer Review

Charles Darwin University (CDU) places the highest importance on upholding the integrity of our research. Researchers have an obligation and a personal responsibility to conduct their research activities in an ethical and professional manner in compliance with the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (2018) (the Australian Code), CDU’s Responsible Conduct of Research Policy and all other applicable policies, laws, guidelines and codes of conduct. A failure to meet these obligations may constitute a breach and, in serious cases, research misconduct.

The Australian Code, sets forth eight (8) principles for responsible research conduct:

Peer review refers to the assessment of research or researchers by others working in the same or a related field. Peer review is used in the selection of works for publication, in the evaluation of funding applications and in the selection and promotion of staff. Peer review plays an important role in research by helping to maintain high standards and encourage accurate, thorough and credible research reporting. It is therefore important that peer review is fair, impartial and independent.

CDU researchers act in accordance with the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (2018) (the Australian Code) and the University’s Responsible Conduct of Research Policy which include the following responsibilities related to peer review:

• Participate in peer review in a way that is fair, rigorous and timely and maintains the confidentiality of the content

All researchers can expect to have their work peer reviewed. Participation as a reviewer is therefore a responsibility of researchers. Participation also provides advantages to individuals by affording them a better understanding of the peer review system and by honing their critical evaluation skills.

Different peer review activities will require varying levels of assessment and reporting, and researchers must follow the relevant guidelines and assessment criteria (e.g., of a journal or funding body). Peer reviewers are expected to have the appropriate expertise, disclose relevant interests, and obtain permission before delegating their responsibilities or requesting assistance with a review. Researchers must not attempt to influence the process or outcomes while their work is under review.

In accordance with Peer Review: A guide supporting the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (the Guide), Peer Review, as defined in the Code (Section 2) is: "the impartial and independent assessment of research by others working in the same or a related field."

There is general agreement that it is an important component of the research process that can help safeguard the quality, reputation and integrity of research (at the individual project level, and to some degree at the institutional, discipline, sector, national and global levels). 

The basic concept of peer review is of one or more learned peers (without a conflict of interest) providing independent and expert advice on specified matters (such as the merit, importance and rigour of the proposed work).

Peer review has a number of important roles in research and research management, including: 

• the assessment of research proposals and grant applications 

• the assessment and selection of material for publication and dissemination 

• the assessment of the research of Higher Degree Research (HDR) candidates 

• the assessment of research quality, engagement and impact by government bodies, and 

• other reviews or assessments of research conducted by individual researchers, teams, academic units and institutions.
  

At CDU, it is generally accepted that a project has undergone Peer Review in the following circumstances:

1. If the research project has been approved through the Confirmation of Candidature (CoC) process for HDR students

2. If the research project has been accessed and approved through a grant application process for external funding

In the cases where a project has not undergone a CoC or grant application, then it is the responsibility of the researchers to seek Peer Review from one or more learned peers (without a conflict of interest).

In accordance with the Investigation Guide (Section 3), insitutions must encouage participation in peer review by:

1. Supporting peer review by recognising the importance of the process by " encouraging and supporting the participation of its researchers" in the peer review process.

2. Providing training to researchers that "promotes and supports responsible research conduct and assists all researchers in relevant aspects of peer reviewprocesses, including training for early career researchers and HDR students."

It is the responsibility of researchers to:

1. Participate in peer review

2. Conduct peer review responsibly

Under the Code, researchers have the responsibility to: 

"R28 Participate in peer review in a way that is fair, rigorous and timely and maintains theconfidentiality of the content."

In their interaction with peer reviewers and systems, CDU researchers must: 

(i) be courteous and respectful; 

(ii) respond promptly and honestly; 

(iii) act with integrity and responsibly; 

(iv) disclose conflicts of interest; 

(v) adhere to CDU's Responsible Conduct of Research policy; 

(vi) adhere to relevant professional standards; 

(vii) comply with relevant laws and regulations; and 

(viii) not seek to unduly influence/manipulate the peer review process.

Given the importance of peer review to the scholarly process, CDU researchers are encouraged to participate as peer reviewers. However, it is essential to only do so in fields, methodologies, topics, populations and contexts where you have the required expertise and to disclose any conflicts of interest, whether perceived, potential, or actual.

Examples of breaches of the Code related to peer review are outlined in Section 5 of the Investigation Guide. These include, but are not limited to: 

• failing to conduct peer review responsibly and fairly 

• taking advantage of knowledge obtained through peer review processes 

• disclosing the content or outcome of peer review processes 

• failing to disclose relevant interests. 

Peer reviewers should familiarise themselves with the processes involved in reporting potential breaches of the Code identified during the peer review process.

CDU encourages staff, students and third parties to report any potential breaches of the Code. The University takes seriously all concerns, complaints, and allegations, including those that are made anonymously. We ask that allegations be made in good faith, confidentially and without malice. Complainants will, as far as practicable, be kept updated about the process of investigating and responding to their complaints.

We strongly encourage reporting, and recommend reading your responsibilities and rights under the University's Whistleblower Reporting (Improper Conduct) Procedure which outlines your responsibilities and rights, including the following duties related to reporting improper conduct:

• All staff of the University and other members of the University community including students, contractor and adjuncts must be aware of their obligations under the ICAC Act to report improper conduct. All members of the senior staff of the University, including Council, must be aware of their obligations to protect Whistleblowers from reprisals.

Under the Australian Code and the University’s Responsible Conduct of Research Policy researchers also have a responsibility to:

• Report suspected breaches of the Code to the relevant institution and/or authority

CDUs Responsible Conduct of Research Procedure, strongly encourages staff, students and third parties to report any potential breaches of the Australian Code.

OPTIONS AVAILABLE

What options are available to academic staff or students when considering making a complaint?

• Discussing the matter directly to the person against whom the complaint may be made, if you feel comfortable and safe to do so. In most cases, concerns can be simply and quickly resolved by raising them at a local level when they arise with the person or area responsible.

• Referring the matter to a person in a line management or supervisory capacity for resolution.

• Discussing your concerns with a Research Integrity Advisor from your faculty, or another faculty. You may also seek advise from the Research Integrity Office.

• In instances where issues cannot be resolved through the above steps, a formal complaint can be made. Make a formal complaint of a breach of the Code in writing to the Designated Officer via the CDU email address: researchintegrity@cdu.edu.au

• Formal complaints can also be made by completing the online Research Integrity Complaints Form. This form will be sent directly to the Research Ethics and Integrity Coordinator to review in the first instance and will be treated in confidence.

Please refer to the below flowchat to see the complaints management process at CDU.

NHMRC:

• Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research (2018) (The Code)

• Peer Review: A guide supporting the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research 
  

CDU Policy:

• Responsible Conduct of Research Policy

• Responsible Conduct of Research Procedure

• Conflict of Interest Policy

• Conflict of Interest Procedure

• Governance Document Library

• CDU website

If you require further information or assistance, please contact the Research Ethics and Integrity team:

Email: researchintegrity@cdu.edu.au

Phone: 08 8946 6063