Research integrity

Scientific research is legitimated by the quality of its execution. Different stakeholders (citizens, government, industry, social midfield, …) count on scientific research for objective and nuanced knowledge accumulation of the highest quality. As one of the leading research institutions, Ghent University puts in efforts every day to maintain, improve and refine the quality demands of research. Therefore quality enhancement is pivotal. Research integrity is an important element of this quality assessment.

Ghent University sensitizes its researchers and supports them through:

• sharing knowledge and expertise on the concept of 'research integrity' and related topics
• a diverse range of training courses in the different phases of their careers, with attention for their task as trainer/teacher
• numerous concrete applications such as an elaborated policy on research data management, guidelines for authors and the recognition of contributions to scientific publishing, etc.
• a support network for the handling of questions and complaints with a Committee for Research Integrity as the central body

Researchers at Ghent University have access to a specific section on the intranet for further information and advice.

Commission for Research Integrity

Guarding research integrity is necessary. Judging if issues of research integrity have been violated is a difficult task. Therefore, in 2010 the Board of Governors established a Committee for Research Integrity (CWI).

In case of questions and/or doubts, you can always contact the secretariat of the Committee for Research Integrity without any obligation and in confidence.

In case of a complaint, an investigative commission of the CWI determines whether or not there has been a violation of the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (ALLEA Code), leading international codes endorsed by Ghent University and/or against the guidelines that apply to the institution and are related to research integrity.

Anyone can report a (suspicion of) violation of research integrity or fraud.

Extra information

• The Committee works according to a fixed Procedure for investigating presumed violations.

• You can read about how the Committee works (composition, responsibilities, …) in the Rules and Regulations.

Second opinion?

If you’re not satisfied with the processing of your complaint by the CWI of Ghent University, you have the opportunity to ask for a second opinion with the Flemish Committee for Research Integrity (VCWI). Please note that this is not an appeal procedure.

Flemish Committee for Research Integrity (VCWI)
secretaris@vcwi.be - Bert Seghers
+32 (0)2 550 23 32

Identity fraud and abuse of Ghent University affiliation by third parties

The information below was jointly developed by the Flemish universities under the umbrella of the Flemish Interuniversity Council (VLIR).

In today's academic landscape, identity fraud (improper use of a researcher's name) and abuse of institutional affiliation by people other than the researchers involved are a growing threat. This is mainly due to the rise of journals that use or allow malpractices, so-called 'predatory publishers', and by 'paper mills'. More and more researchers report that their names appear as authors on articles they never collaborated on, published in obscure journals (Grove, 2023; Orally, 2024; Kincaid, 2025; Sohn, 2023). In other cases, a university is falsely mentioned, for example as an affiliation of non-existent researchers, to give an article extra credibility.

Impact

The consequences of mis-stating one's name or affiliation can be far-reaching and affect several parties, especially if the publications are of questionable quality or origin.

• For researchers, this can lead to reputational damage and loss of confidence in the quality and integrity of their (other) work, not only with the general public, but also with funders and collaborative partners.
• The same goes for their university: people with bad intentions hitch a ride on the name and work of others, creating an uneven playing field. Moreover, because such practices are difficult to correct or avoid, researchers often experience this as frustrating and demotivating.
• Journals risk publishing articles based on false references, which affects their credibility.
• And more broadly, this undermines trust in science itself, in which transparency and verifiability are crucial. Because most of these articles are not included in major databases such as Web of Science or PubMed, they often remain under the radar for a long time [5]. As a result, so called 'research results' of questionable quality nevertheless become available for reuse or application, with potentially dangerous consequences, for example (but not limited to) health research or policy-oriented research.

Unfortunately, Flemish universities and their researchers have also already fallen victim to such practices. KU Leuven, in collaboration with the University of Antwerp and the other Flemish universities, is currently investigating articles in journals that fall under the OMICS umbrella. These include publishers such as Longdom Publishing SL, Allied Academies, Hilaris, iMedPub and Prime Scholars. During this research, several articles were found in which either researcher names or institutional affiliations were used incorrectly. Unfortunately, the problem does not seem to be limited to the OMICS group: fraudulent publications are also turning up at other publishers.

Cases

The Committee for Research Integrity (CWI) has built up knowledge and expertise in contacting journals about these issues. It goes without saying that corrections, if they take place at all, often take a long time and are only possible after persistent contact. The CWI is therefore happy to take over communication with journals from researchers.