Sorry! De informatie die je zoekt, is enkel beschikbaar in het Engels.
This programme is saved into My study choice.
This programme cannot be saved.
You are not logged in yet to My study choice Portal. Login or create an account to save your programmes.
Something went wrong, try again later.

SBE Research Office

The SBE Research Office is your first contact for questions on research-related activities of the School of Business and Economics of VU Amsterdam.

For our researchers, we offer advice on and support for funding, contracts, budgets, data management, valorisation, and project management.

For our external contacts, we are your first contact if you are looking for collaboration opportunities with one of our scientific experts.

For SBE, we coordinate all internal research-related policies, output administration (Pure) and the school’s annual output assessment and research time allocation.

The Research Office provides support for research-related activities. More specifically, we offer:

  • information and advice on funding opportunities;
  • support for the development and submission of research proposals with respect to legal, financial, and administrative issues;
  • advice on project design and management.

In addition, we:

  • offer a single point of entry for outside partners to collaborate with us on research related activities;
  • systematically collect and document information on research activities within SBE;
  • are in direct contact with experts within VU Amsterdam (e.g. Subsidiedesk, International Office, IXA) and outside VU Amsterdam (e.g. NWO, RvO);
  • collect and disseminate information on best practices.

Do you need help with practical, financial, administrative, or legal issues? We can give you advice on how to develop your idea into a research proposal and support you in all the steps of the grant application. Contact us at

Read more

  • Funding opportunities

    Below we have listed a selection of funding organizations and their grants. For access to a more complete list of funding opportunities (large and small), contact us at

    Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO):
    Veni (max. 250 k, researchers who recently obtained their PhD)
    Vidi (max. 800 k, experienced researchers)
    Vici (max. 1.5 mln, senior researchers)
    Rubicon (work abroad for researchers who recently obtained their PhD)
    Aspasia (in order to speed up the promotion of female scientists) (attached to VIDI and VICI)

    European Research Council (ERC):
    Starting grant (max. 1.5 mln, researchers with 2-7 years of experience since completion of heir PhD)
    Consolidator grant (max. 2 mln, researchers with 7-12 years of experience since completion of their PhD)
    Advanced grant (max. 2.5 mln, active, leading researchers with a track-record of significant research achievements in the last 10 years).

    European Commission (EC) - Marie Sklodowska-Curie:
    Individual Fellowship (work abroad for experienced researchers with a doctoral degree or at least four years’ full-time research experience)
    ITN (consortia of universities, research centres and companies train a new generation of researchers through developing skills in entrepreneurship, creativity and innovation).

    European Commission (EC) - Societal Challenges
    In cooperation with other academic and non-academic partners from different EU member states, large research projects are set up on topics under the thematic workprogrammes.

    Data management plan

    It is increasingly common for grant providers to require research proposals to include a data management plan. In this document, the researcher indicates how he or she plans to collect, process and store the necessary research data. Each grant provider has certain requirements, especially for data storage.
    Information on the data management policy of the School of Business and Economics is provided here: [ link naar data management]

    On VUnet you will also find information, guidelines and templates for data management plans (login).

  • Developing your research proposal

    The SBE Research Office can support you in developing your research proposal. Of course, for the innovative ideas and scientific content you should gain advice from your peers in your research unit. For more generic parts of (particularly EU) proposals, however, we can help in providing good, standard texts. We can also bring you into contact with other faculty who have secured similar grants. Note that checks on your budget and on legal issues of your proposal deserve special attention.

    We offer the following support:

    • Understanding call background and guidelines
    • Advice on project design (for selected applications)
    • Budget set up (signalling function)
    • Review of your proposal (for selected applications)
    • Support with the actual submission procedure
    • Providing (annotated) templates, forms, standard texts, letters etc.

    We can also bring you into contact with other faculty who have secured similar grants. Note that checks on your budget and on legal issues of your proposal deserve special attention.

    For more generic parts of (particularly EU) proposals, however, we can help in providing good, standard texts. We can also bring you into contact with other faculty who have secured similar grants. Note that checks on your budget and on legal issues of your proposal deserve special attention.

    Budgets and budget check/support

    Before you submit any proposal, the explicit approval of the project control department is required. Of course, this is also to your advantage: a check by project control guarantees that the costs included in your budget are eligible and properly categorized, taking into account future increases in salary costs, overhead issues etc. In this way, financial risks are minimized. Note that without approval of the project control department, the School cannot be held responsible for any financial problems occurring during or after project execution. For a budget check, support, advice and approval, send an email to: It is also possible to contact them by telephone and/or make an appointment:

    Projectcontrol is every Tuesday afternoon in room 8A-92.

    Legal checks

    The same holds for legal contracts: Research Office works closely with legal experts who can assess research contracts and agreements. The School’s Managing Director signs these documents only after explicit consent of a legal advisor and the financial department.

  • Research Ethics and Integrity

    The scientific enterprise depends to a large extent on trust. Our researchers trust that the scientific knowledge on which they base their own research is reliable, scrupulous, objective and impartial. In turn, academics from around the globe trust that our researchers apply appropriate methods of inquiry and analysis, report results honestly and accurately and maintain high standards of ethics and integrity themselves as well.

    This trust-based quality assurance system requires from everyone involved in research to behave responsibly and ethically. The responsible conduct of research is considered a key priority at the Amsterdam Business Research Institute (ABRI) of Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.

    Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam as a whole endorses the rules as formulated by the Royal Netherlands Academy for Arts and Sciences (KNAW),  and as developed by Association of universities in the Netherlands (VSNU). At European level, the European Science Foundation (ESF) and All European Academies (ALLEA) have adopted an English-language code detailing the principles and rules relating to research integrity.

    The VU Executive Board and the VUmc Governing Board have adopted an Academic Integrity Complaints Procedure. The procedure states how a complaint regarding a suspected violation of academic integrity should be handled. Within the context of this procedure, the institutions have jointly established an Academic Integrity Committee.

    Rules alone are not sufficient to ensure academic integrity; the rules have to be observed and translated into concrete measures. This is an area in which new dilemmas are likely to arise and they can only be met with an adequate response if they are the subject of discussion in the workplace. The Executive Board of Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and the Governing Board of VUmc have undertaken to organize and promote such discussions. 

    In education, too, the issue of academic integrity needs to be addressed since a university education prepares students for a career in research or trains them for jobs in which they work with the results of scientific research. 

    Partly with a view to developing educational programmes in this area, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and VUmc have established a chair in Methodology and Integrity, held by Prof. Lex Bouter.

    SBE Research Ethics Review Board

    About the RERB

    The Review Ethics Review Board (RERB) supports that research involving human subjects is carried out in compliance with relevant institutional, national and international ethics regulations and legal requirements.

    The RERB currently consists of the following persons:

    Chair: prof.dr. Harmen Verbruggen

    Members: prof. dr. Martijn van den Assem (Finance), dr. ir. Fleur Deken (KIN), dr. Femke van Horen (Marketing), dr. Menusch Khadjavi Pour (Spatial Economics), dr. Maria Tims (Management & Organisation).

    Secretary: dr. Kacana Khadjavi Pour

    When to apply

    SBE requires researchers to review all studies that involve (data of) human subjects on ethical issues. The goal of the RERB is to help researchers make their study ethically acceptable. Therefore, the RERB only handles applications of studies that have not yet started.

    Every researcher can do the online self-check and/or hand in a full ethics application. When you are a PhD-student, please include the name of your promotor.

    In case your study is medical in nature, please apply for ethical approval at the medical-ethical review board of Amsterdam UMC.

    How to apply

    The RERB acts according to the ‘comply or explain’- principle. When your study design complies to the criteria in the online self-check, further ethical review is not needed. When your study design does not comply, you can explain your reasons in a full ethical review.

    Steps to follow as a researcher:

    0.Does your study involve (data of) human subjects?

    If it does, proceed to step 1. In case it doesn’t, ethical approval of your study is not needed.

    1. Online self-check

    The first step in the review process is the online self-check. With this tool, you can check whether your study needs full ethical review. In case the conclusion of the self-check is that your study does not need full ethical review, you will receive a PDF with the given answers on the self-check, and a statement by the RERB that your research complies with SBE’s ethical guidelines. You can use this document for further communication, e.g. when submitting a paper to a journal, or a research proposal to an external funding agency.

    Click here to start the self-check.

    2. Full ethics review application

    If the self-check concludes that your study needs a full ethical review, you can fill out the application form here and send it to

    3. Advice

    After reviewing the application, the ethics committee will decide whether the proposed study is in accordance with the SBE guidelines for research ethics, and, if needed, give advice to improve the research design. The committee may consult external experts for the assessment of applications. It is possible that the committee asks you for more information or to make adaptions to your study design before it concludes that it conforms with the SBE guidelines.

    You can expect an ethical advise as soon as possible, but not later than 12 weeks after application.

    Documents and links

    1. Application form ethics review
    2. Ethical guidelines for researchers
    3. Decision tree WMO VUmc (Dutch)
    4. Medical-ethical review board (METC VUmc) of the Amsterdam UMC (Dutch)
    5. Netherlands Code of Conduct for Research Integrity


    For questions and submissions of application forms, contact the secretary of the RERB, Kacana Khadjavi Pour.

  • Research Data Management at SBE

    What is data?

    Research data includes any materials or information sources that were collected, processed and/or analyzed in order to support or describe research findings. Examples are text files, spreadsheets, surveys, code books, scripts, audio recordings, computational models, databases from secondary sources, specimens, etc.

    Every researcher handles quite an amount of data during research. In order to keep your data understandable and useful for yourself, colleagues and third parties, proper data management is key.

    Data life cycle

    Data is the fundament of scientific research. Since data plays a crucial role throughout the entire research cycle, it is important to think about research data management from the very start of your research. Planning ahead saves you a lot of time.

    FAIR principles

    A useful basis for sound data management are the FAIR principles. FAIR stands for Findable,Accessible,Interoperable, Reusable. Making your data FAIR enhances the value and impact of you data. Both you and others will benefit from FAIR data.

    FAIR data and Open Science are connected, but are not the same. Adopting FAIR principles does not per definition mean you must share your data with the entire world. For example, ‘findable’ could refer to making data findable for you and your colleagues, for collaborating companies and universities, or for everyone.

    More information about FAIR data can be found on the UBVU website.

    What's in it for me as a researcher?

    Adopting good RDM practices will help you to:

    ·        Increase research efficiency

    ·        Increase your visibility and impact as a researcher

    ·        Promote wider dissemination and increased impact of results

    ·        Enhance data security, by minimizing the risk of loss, theft or misuse of data

    ·        Ensure sound processing of (privacy) sensitive data

    What's in it for the world?

    Good RDM practices - starting by making your data FAIR - will enhance transparency and sustainability of scientific research.

    Tools for data management?

    The following section will be updated regularly with hands-on materials to help researchers with data management. 

    > Support before research:

    A checklist for writing an informed consent letter. 

    Ethical advice or approval for research involving (data of) humans participants. 

    With the tool DMPonline you can easily write a data management plan and benefit from guidance and example answers. You can log in with your VU credentials. 

    Some quick guidance for writing a data management plan (DMP) can be found here.

    > Support during research:

    An decision tree of current data storage options suitable for most research at SBE. Note that new storage options (e.g. ResearchDrive) are in the pipeline!

    Possibilities for extra computational power

    What data to keep and what data to bin, with help of Marie Kondo.

    > Support after research:

    The VU policy on RDM states that you should register your data at Pure to increase findability and transparency. This manual will help you.

    How to publish open access

    Make yourself findable as a researcher by getting an ORCID identifier. 

    > Other tips:

    VU library has an extensive LibGuide on research data management.

    This road map guides you in managing your research data. 

    SBE also has a research data management policy.

    The Consortium of European Social Sciences Data Archives (CESSDA) provides hands-on tips about data management.


    For questions or advice on RDM, you can contact SBE’s data steward Kacana Khadjavi Pour or VU library.

  • VU Research Portal

    Pure is the web-based Research Information System of Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. It brings together key information on research staff and their publications, projects and activities information. In addition, Pure allows for linking research inputs and outputs, providing a broad picture of research activities at the individual, research unit, faculty and university levels.

    Login to Pure

    The publications registered in Pure are visible on the website on the VU Research Portal. Here you find also the researcher profiles and information on their networks.

    If you have questions concerning Pure and the Research Portal, you can contact the Pure Administrators of SBE:

    - Ellen Woudstra,

    - Ina Putter,

    Additional information can be found in the school’s research assessments.

  • Research time allocation

    The School of Business and Economics, aiming for high quality research, maintains an ambitious system of allocation of research funds, based on the assessment of output. Funds are translated to full time equivalents, which are distributed among the members of staff, according to their relative performance in terms of (research-based) publications.

    The research funding is meant for members of the scientific staff with an appointment on the account of the university ('eerste geldstroom') or on a structural externally funded position. PhD students and post-docs are not entitled to research funding, other than the funding agreed upon at the start of their contract.

    Entitlements to research funding are expressed in percentages of full-time equivalents. A maximum of 50 percent can be allocated. The percentage obtained ought to be multiplied with the employment factor (wtf) and reduced by possible budget cuts, to arrive at the number of working hours to be dedicated to research. The minimum research time is 20 percent (= 1,16 credits in 2020).

    Rules of assessment

    The assessment of research output is based on the classification of the five best publications out of the past five years. These five titles are selected by the researcher from the national research database Pure, which is updated throughout the year, most of the time by the researcher himself.

    The ranking of the journals is based on the journal’s Article Influence Score, which can be found on the ISI Web of Knowledge (Additional Resources → Journal Citation Reports). A journal’s weight is derived from the Article Influence percentile. If the AIp is available for the year of publication, that value will be used. If the publication is too recent, the most recent AIp will be used. The most recent table can be found here.

    To determine the journal’s weight, the percentile is first divided by 100, and then squared.

    For a single-authored journal publication, the amount of credits obtained is simply equal to the journal’s weight in the year that the article was published. With multiple authors, that weight is multiplied by 0.75 to obtain the number of credits.

    Dissertations receive 0.45 credits. In addition, dissertations that are reissued as monograph by a scientific publisher will be treated as such.

    The listed publishers are classified as A or B; publications with non-listed publishers receive no credits. Single-authored monographs receive 0.85 credits for an A publisher and 0.60 for a B publisher. These scores are multiplied by 0.75 in case of multiple authors. Researchers can submit a maximum of one monograph for the allocation of research time.

    Book reviews are not included in the assessment. Other short journal publications - including editorials (for edited special issues), comments, very short notes, etc. - may qualify for inclusion provided they make a sufficient scientific contribution. Judgements are to be made by a temporary committee. The number of pages is of no consequence for the credits attributed.

    Summarising, the following credits are attributed:

    Single author
    Multiple authors



    In general, there will be no deviations from the journal weights thus defined, with the following exceptions:

    1. Accounting

    It has become clear that accounting journals are exceptionally poorly represented in Web of Science, and the scores of the journals that are included in the Web of Science are very low. For that reason, we use the Scopus SJR journal (Percentile) list to map the Accounting journal list. This results in a system that allows accounting to be evaluated comparably to AIP despite the absence of most journals. You will find the mapping list here.

    2. Unintended outlets

    Researchers qualifying for research time are expected to publish in journals that are natural outlets for the fields in which they are active. When journals outside those fields are used and lead to disproportional amounts of credits being earned, the SBE Board may consult a temporary committee and decide to block the future use of those journals in the research allocation system.

    Changed regulations for allocation of research time 2021

    SBE has made adjustments to its research time allocation system. The basic principles remain that we value quality over quantity of publications and that researchers have autonomy in publishing decisions. The following changes will become effective for research time allocation for 2021:

    1.      We will use the three-year moving average of AIPs

    Starting from 2019, we will use the three-year moving average of Article Influence Percentiles (AIPs) to smoothen fluctuations in these scores. For publications in 2019, we will use the average of the AIP scores for 2017, 2018, and 2019. For 2020 publications, the three-year moving average for 2019 will be used until the 2020 AIP scores become available (the moving average will then be calculate based upon 2018, 2019, and 2020 scores). These moving averages will also be used for career track evaluations. For older publications, we will continue to use the annual AIP scores so that these scores stay the same, and there will be no (potentially) unpleasant surprises.

    2.      Publications in top journals will count for six or seven years instead of five

    Top journal publications may count one or two years longer. This recognizes that publications in top journals are a signal of high quality and have exceptional impact, yet require a long time to get accepted and are subject to high risks. Specifically, publications in journals with AIP 0.96 will count for six years and with AIP ≥0.97 for seven years, starting from the moment of online publication or final publication (depending upon the author’s preference). So, whereas regular papers published in 2020 may count for research time in the period 2021-2025, publications in journals with AIP ≥0.97 may count for the years 2021-2027). These extensions also hold for publications from earlier years, so you can profit one or two years longer from top journal publications from the past.

    3.      Researchers have the option to use one of the five publication slots for an article-level citation-based score

    Some publications outside top journals are highly cited and have a disproportionally high impact in their field. To recognize this and to stimulate attention for the impact of publications, you get the option to earn research time based upon citations for one article. This is also aligned with the principle of autonomy (acknowledging that scientific impact can be reached in multiple ways)and enable adaptation to new topics and new journals (as article-level citation scores are available much earlier than journal-based metrics).

    How does it work?

    • For one publication, you have the option to choose either the AI percentile of the journal or the citation percentile of the publication, to calculate publication points.
    • We use the citation-percentile as offered in Scopus  (as these are not available in Web of Science). If you enter your name, a list of publications with the number of citations will appear. When you click on the title of the publication, you will see a new page with the metrics of the publication. You will find the percentile on the right. This reflects the percentile score of its citations as compared to articles of roughly the same age. Because Scopus contains more than twice as many journals as Web of Science, the citation-based percentile needs to be adjusted by doubling the distance to the top percentile (e.g., 0.96 becomes 0.92). This adjusted score needs to be squared, just like AI percentiles, and multiplied by 0.75 for co-authored publications.
    • The same 5-year window will be used: for research time in 2021, the citation percentile of one paper published between 2016-2020 could count.
    • Articles need to have at least 10 Scopus citations as a minimum.
    • The optional replacement of one journal-level score for an article-level score only holds for research time allocation, not for career track decisions. The career track has separate criteria for citations.

    4.      Optional transition to online publication dates

    You have the option to use the date your publication appears first online instead of the date they appear in an issue (as we do now). This matters when there is a long time-lag between the first time a paper appears online (often soon after acceptance) and the moment it appears in a (paper) issue. If you choose this option, the date of “first publication” as indicated on the journal’s website is decisive. The five-year window of evaluation will remain the same. So, if you transition to using “online first” publication dates, you can benefit earlier from publications, but they will also move out of the evaluation window earlier. You have to inform SBE’s Research Office if you opt for moving to “online first” publication dates. This choice applies to all publications simultaneously and is permanent – it cannot be changed from year to year.

    5.      Publications need to be available open access to count (if possible)

    To count for research time, publications have to be available open access, unless no route to do so is available. The open access requirement can be met through one of the following routes:

    ·        golden route: publishing in full open-access journal (e.g., PLOS One);

    ·        hybrid route: using the option to make a paper open access in a regular journal (e.g. covered by  VSNU deals ; see;

    ·        fast green route: making it public in the VU repository by participating in the “You share, we take care” project. In this project, the VU library will automatically make publications open-access after six months; the only thing         researchers need to do is to indicate their participation through  this online form. See also the  Q&A about “You share, we take care.”

    This rule does not hold for:

    • Books
    • Publications created while the author was not at a Dutch university.
    • Papers published before 2018 (as the VU library will only work back until 2018).
    • Papers published in the last six months of the most recent year (as the “You share, we take care” project uses a six-month embargo)

    6.      Datasets generated at VU have to be registered in Pure

    For publications (from 2020 and later) that are based upon a dataset generated at VU, the dataset needs to be registered in Pure for the publication to count.

    More and more researchers make their data openly available, thereby stimulating scientific progress and integrity of research, but also increasing citations to their work. Thus, the ambition of the VU and SBE is to make data FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable) where possible. Although there are various reasons why not all datasets can be made open / FAIR (e.g. privacy, confidentiality, ownership), a first step is possible for most studies: making datasets findable by registering them in Pure. VU Research Data Management policy stipulates that datasets generated at the VU must be registered in Pure. Please note that registration as dataset does not entail making the data public, nor storing it at a central location. Dataset registration only indicates the nature of the data, the place of storage, a contact person for the data, and possible way to get access. Those researchers who publish datasets along with a paper or in a discipline specific repository can link to those locations in their Pure registration. To maintain the autonomy of researchers we are not mandating to archive or publish it in one particular place.

    This requirement does not apply to: (1) publications with no data (e.g. conceptual papers); (2) publications that reuse data from others; (3) data generated prior to employment at the VU; (4) data thatis generated by co-authors not at the VU; (5) data that is owned by others or where agreements prohibit making any meta-information about the data public. When submitting your publications to SBE’s Research Office you can explain why compliance is irrelevant or impossible. 

    Former changes:

    As of 2018, chapters and edited volumes will no longer receive credits for the allocation of research time.

    To smoothen the transition between the previous ranking and the new one, the following rules will apply:

    • Chapters and edited volumes that are submitted before 2018 will still be taken into account for the allocation of research time for 2018.
    • For the allocation of research time for 2019 or later, this rule applies only if proof is provided that the commitment to publish the book, or make the contribution, was made before January 1 2018.

    Single-authored contributions to an edited volume receive 0.45 for an A-publisher and 0.15 for a B-publisher. Also these scores are multiplied by 0.75 in case of multiple authors. If an author has contributed more than one contribution to an edited volume, the total amount of credits derived from this volume cannot exceed the credits attributed to a monograph issued by the same publisher.

    Specific regulations

    SBE has formulated some regulations for researchers on pregnancy and maternity leave, for part time researchers and for contract research:

    Regulations for pregnancy and maternity leave
    Researchers who have been on a pregnancy and maternity leave during that period, are allowed to submit their five best publications over the past six years.

    Regulations for part time researchers
    The special regulations for part time researchers are set out in the table below. The principle underlying this ruling is that part time researchers can spend less time in producing scientific output, compared to full time colleagues, and are allowed under this regulation to double count their best publication(s). The extent to which publications can be double counted depends on the researcher's appointment and can be read from the table below.

    appointment fte (average) 5 or more publications4 publications   3 publications 

    0.81-1.00  12345 1234123
    0.71-0.80   123441234123
    0.61-0.70  1233412344123
    0.51-0.60  12234123341233
    0.50 and less   11223122341223

    1= best publication
    2= second best publication, etc.

    When a researcher has less than 3 publications, the score will not be adjusted. The average appointment in fte will be calculated over the part of the 5-year period during which the researcher was appointed at SBE.

    Researchers who want to use this regulatuion must state this explicitly. They also have to show that they could not do any research outside the SBE-appointment (for example: a researcher who works for 0,5 fte at another faculty, is not allowed to appeal under this regulation.

    Regulations for contract researchers
    Departments receive a premium of 5000 euros for every fte of contract researchers, PhD students inclusive.    
    The premium can be spent on research related activities (conferences, traveling, seminars, academic guests, research assistants, etc.). 

    The premium is only meant for contract researchers and not for researchers working on NWO grants.       
    Contract researchers cannot appeal under the standard regulations for the allocation of research funding from the School.

    Publishers list

    The latest publishers list (2016) you will find here.

    Cambridge University Press (also USA)
    Edward Elgar Publishing
    Elsevier (including Academic Press)
    Emerald Group Publishing
    Harvard University PressA
    MIT Press Publishers Inc.A
    Oxford University PressA
    Palgrave Macmillan
    Princeton University PressA
    Sage Publishing
    Taylor and Francis (including Ashgate, CRS Press, Chapman & Hall and Routledge for humanities, social sciences, behavioural sciences, law and education)
    University of Chicago PressA
  • Complaints procedure

    It may be that you have encountered situations in your working environment or in the course of your own work, which have raised questions regarding academic integrity or a violation thereof. You may be wondering whether you should make a complaint. The sections below explain what you can do with your questions or complaints.  

    Whom can you turn to?

    Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam has an ombudsman. You can turn to the ombudsman to ask questions about academic integrity, to present them with dilemmas or to report a suspected case. As a matter of principle, all contact with the ombudsman is strictly confidential. The ombudsman has the authority to initiate a further investigation into the admissibility of a complaint and to issue a recommendation to the VU Executive Board.

    Where can I lodge a complaint?

    In general, it is advisable to contact the VU ombudsman before you do anything else. Your case will be looked at collectively to determine whether it provides grounds for a formal complaint.

    You can make your complaint in a letter or email addressed to the VU Executive Board or you can direct it to either of these boards through the ombudsman.

    What happens once a complaint has been lodged?

    A full account of what happens can be found in the complaints procedure: Academic Integrity Complaints Procedure. The handling of a complaint can be outlined as follows.

    Once the Executive Board has received your complaint, the ombudsman is asked to issue a recommendation on its admissibility. The complaint is then submitted to the Academic Integrity Committee together with the ombudsman’s recommendation.

    The Committee first assesses whether the complaint is admissible and provides grounds for further investigation. If that is the case, the Committee informs all those involved and launches a substantive investigation into the details of the case.

    Once the investigation is complete, the Committee advises the Executive Board about whether or not the complaint is well-founded. The Executive Board then takes a formal decision on this matter, ruling either that the complaint is well-founded (i.e. that there are sufficient facts to substantiate the complaint) or unfounded (i.e. that there are insufficient facts to substantiate the complaint).

    If a complainant or defendant does not agree with a decision taken by the Executive Board or Governing Board, he or she may request a ruling by the National Board for Research Integrity (LOWI). The LOWI will only consider complaints which have already been subject to a decision by the board of the institution.

  • Literature and Media

    Here you can find various resources related to ethics and integrity in academic research and publishing. 

    ORI Lab Game

    The Office of Research Integrity of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Servives has developed a simulation game called "The Lab: Avoiding Research Misconduct”, which presents the player with various ethical dilemma’s concerning daily research practices.

    Souce: Office of Research Integrity (ORI)


    ABRI highly recommends watching the Academy of Management Ethics of Research and Publishing video series. This eight part series explores questions in academic research and publishing on the topics of Authorship, Plagiarism, Slicing the Data in Publications, Publishing in Journals, Conference Papers and Presentations, Reporting Research, Reviewing Manuscripts, and Global Ethics in Publishing.


    Ethics Video Series: Authorship - YouTube

    Ethics Video Series: Plagiarism - YouTube

    Ethics Video Series: Publishing in Journals - YouTube

    Ethics Video Series: Conference Papers and Presentations - YouTube

    Ethics Video Series: Slicing the Data in Publications - YouTube

    Ethics Video Series: Reporting Research - YouTube

    Ethics Video Series: Reviewing Manuscripts - YouTube

    Ethics Video Series: Global Ethics in Publishing - YouTube

    Recommended literature

    • Fanelli, D, (2009). How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data, Plos One, Volume: 4 Issue: 5 Article Number: e5738
    • Kacmar, MK, (2009). An Ethical Quiz, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 52, No. 3, 432-434
    • Martin, BR, (2013). Whither research integrity? Plagiarism, self-plagiarism and coercive citation in an age of research assessment, Research Policy, Volume: 42 Issue: 5 Pages: 1005-1014
    • Martinson, BC; Anderson, MS; de Vries, R. (2005). Scientists behaving badly, Nature, p 737 – 738
    • Steneck, NH, (2006). Fostering integrity in research: Definitions, current knowledge, and future directions, Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume: 12 Issue: 1 Special Issue: SI Pages: 53-74
    • Treviño, LK (2008). Editor’s Comments: Why review? Because reviewing is a professional responsibility, Academy of Management Review, 2008, Vol. 33, No. 8-10