Select committee: Science and Technology Committee (Commons)
Conclusion 24
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and Research Integrity
Published 10 May 2023
Paragraph 127
Addressed to Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
Science and Technology Committee (Commons) Reproducibility and research integrity All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Conclusion (the committee's words)
Reward structures in academia disincentivise reproducibility by placing disproportionate value on secured funding and frequent publication in prestigious journals.
From: Science and Technology Committee (Commons), Sixth Report - Reproducibility and Research Integrity (HC 101), paragraph 127, 10 May 2023
Government response
The government responded to the whole report on 21 July 2023 (deadline 10 July 2023).
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.The government and UKRI say they "partially accept the majority of the conclusions and recommendations", and where they have not accepted them they point to "existing or planned actions".
- It does not accept the recommendations for a co-produced misconduct framework or an additional investigating body, saying the Government "should not be in the business of investigating research misconduct".
- It accepts the recommendation on greater emphasis on reproducibility and research integrity in education and training, citing UKRI's Collective Talent Funding programme.
- It does not accept the recommendation for a three-year minimum contract for postdoctoral researchers, saying linking contracts to grants "is not a stipulation of UKRI grant terms and conditions" and that research organisations are responsible for employment contracts.
- On narrative CVs, it partially accepts the recommendation but says it is "unable to commit all funders" to exclusive use; UKRI's rollout of the R4RI format "is expected to be in place by the end of 2023".