Logo image
Back
Essentials of Research Integrity for Ecologists
Journal article   Peer reviewed

Essentials of Research Integrity for Ecologists

Thomas A. Schlacher, Yasser Assaf, Carlos Barboza, Guilherme Corte, Leonardo Costa, Jenifer E. Dugan, Michael Elliott, Kyle A. Emery, Lucia Fanini, David M. Hubbard, …
Estuarine, coastal and shelf science, Vol.331, pp.1-7
04/2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2025.109686
Appears in  Recent Faculty of Science and Engineering Publications

Metrics

1 Record Views

Abstract

best practice ethics misconduct morals predatory journals
1. The cadence, intensity, and breadth of global change have never been greater. Ideally, society's responses to this change are public policies derived from trusted scientific evidence produced by ethical research conduct: such 'research of integrity' is critical for public trust in the scientific endeavour and, hence, its value to society at large. 2. The facets of research integrity span a broad ambit of ethical, moral, cultural, and epistemological domains that can appear bewilderingly complex to practitioners. Here, we provide a succinct summary of the main requirements and associated principles. 3. Respecting the primacy of Indigenous rights, cultures, and knowledge is crucially important for ecologists, and this must be done sincerely and sensitively. 4. Avoiding or minimising harm to sentient animals is a universal practice, and extending harm reduction to habitats is a logical development. However, common sense must prevail to avoid bureaucratic overreach that can result in perverse outcomes where critical conservation work is left undone because of overly stringent permit conditions. 5. The best empirical evidence is morally tainted, and hence mistrusted, when it emerges from a culture of discrimination (e.g. gender, origin, age) or is biased by political or religious interference in the scientific process. 6. The cardinal requirement for the evidence put forward is for it to present precisely the actual facts: absolute truth is the conditio sine qua non for all scientific outputs. 7. Science has self-correcting and quality-assurance mechanisms: stringent quality control during the publication process (e.g., independent peer review, close editorial oversight, reputable journals and publishers) and open science (e.g., data availability) – all actors must uphold both. 8. Across all domains, transparency and openness are the key attributes in all stages of the scientific process: they allow for culturally safe and ethically just practices to be visible and for information to be verifiable.

Details

Logo image