Reproducibility and research integrity

Science, Innovation and Technology Committee Closed Inquiry
Opened: 22 Jul 2021 Closed: 19 Feb 2024 Parliament page
As the UK seeks to recover from the pandemic, research and innovation has the ability to drive economic growth, with UKRI estimating that every £1 spent on research and development delivers £7 in economic and social benefit. However, the integrity of research, especially medical and social science research, is at … Read more
21 Recommendations
7 Conclusions
1 Report
4 Oral sessions
1 Letter
4 Events
Activity timeline 11 events
21 Jul
2023
Report published
10 May
2023
Report published
25 Feb
2022
Correspondence
2 Feb
2022
Oral evidence
2 Feb
2022
Formal meeting (oral evidence session) · Room 6, Palace of Westminster
19 Jan
2022
Oral evidence
19 Jan
2022
Formal meeting (oral evidence session) · Room 8, Palace of Westminster
15 Dec
2021
Oral evidence
15 Dec
2021
Formal meeting (oral evidence session) · Room 8, Palace of Westminster
1 Dec
2021
Oral evidence
1 Dec
2021
Formal meeting (oral evidence session) · Room 8, Palace of Westminster
Oral evidence sessions 4 sessions
2 Feb 2022
View on parliament.uk
George Freeman MP · Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy James Parry · UK Research Integrity Office Professor Dame Ottoline Leyser · UK Research and Innovation (UKRI)
19 Jan 2022
View on parliament.uk
Dr Adrian Weller · University of Cambridge Professor Sebastian Vollmer · TU Kaiserslautern
15 Dec 2021
View on parliament.uk
Dr Alina Chan · Viral: The Search for the Origin of Covid-19 Dr Ben Goldacre · Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford Dr Elizabeth Moylan · Wiley Dr Jessica Butler · University of Aberdeen Dr Ritu Dhand · Springer Nature Richard Horton · The Lancet The Viscount Ridley DL · Viral: The Search for the Origin of Covid-19
1 Dec 2021
View on parliament.uk
Dr Ivan Oransky · Retraction Watch Dr Janine Austin Clayton · Office of Research on Women’s Health at the United States National Institute for Health Professor Dorothy Bishop · University of Oxford Professor Marcus Munafò · UK Reproducibility Network Steering Group Professor Neil Ferguson OBE · Imperial College London
Title HC No. Published Items Response
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and Research Integrity HC 101 10 May 2023 28 Responded
Recommendations & Conclusions
28 results
1 Conclusion Accepted
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Insufficient quantitative evidence on UK research integrity issues hinders effective policy responses.
Although qualitative evidence indicates a potentially substantial scale of research integrity issues in the UK, there is a lack of quantitative evidence, including on the relative significance of the different causes of problems. This can only hamper efforts to evaluate … Read more
Government Response
The government states that the newly established UKRI Committee on Research Integrity (UK CORI) has a role in improving the evidence base on research integrity, thereby addressing the identified lack of quantitative data.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
2 Conclusion Not Addressed
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Prioritise addressing reproducibility challenges comprehensively across all academic research disciplines.
Though the specific problems faced differ, all research disciplines are affected by the systemic issues that limit reproducibility. The established view that issues are concentrated in the social and medical sciences is outdated and tackling reproducibility challenges should be a … Read more
Government Response
The government's response highlights the variability in reproducibility requirements and practices across different research fields funded by UKRI, without directly addressing the committee's call for tackling reproducibility to be a priority in every field.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
3 Recommendation Deferred
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Mandate UK CORI to publish annual research integrity reports and a detailed strategy action plan.
Despite significant delays, we welcome the establishment of UK Committee on Research Integrity (UK CORI) as a potential answer to existing research integrity challenges. We ask UK CORI to commit to produce an annual state of the nation report on … Read more
Government Response
The response does not cover those recommendations which are addressed to UKCORI, who will respond separately.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
4 Recommendation Deferred
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Establish a dedicated UK CORI sub-committee to address research reproducibility challenges
It is disappointing that UK CORI’s recently published strategy did not mention reproducibility, especially since our inquiry highlighted that this is a major research integrity issue. UK CORI should make sure reproducibility challenges are given due attention and not overlooked … Read more
Government Response
The response does not cover those recommendations which are addressed to UKCORI, who will respond separately.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
5 Recommendation Deferred
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Require UK CORI to investigate AI's impact on research reproducibility in annual reports
The increased application of artificial intelligence (AI) in scientific research presents a challenge to traditional research methods. The UK Committee on Research Integrity (UK CORI) should specifically: investigate the impact of deploying AI— and other increasingly complex software—on reproducibility in … Read more
Government Response
The response does not cover those recommendations which are addressed to UKCORI, who will respond separately.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
6 Conclusion Acknowledged
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Significant reproducibility challenges in scientific research necessitate urgent action
Whilst significant reproducibility challenges are faced in research, to refer to the sum of these issues as a “crisis” risks detracting from the many successes of the UK’s scientific research base. Nonetheless, there is need for action to address the … Read more
Government Response
The government acknowledges the need for action on reproducibility challenges, highlighting existing efforts like the R&D People and Culture Strategy and the Future Research Assessment Programme to strengthen research culture and integrity without committing to new specific actions.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
7 Recommendation Rejected
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Develop a co-produced framework for responding to research misconduct cases effectively
The UK’s lacks an established infrastructure for responding to research misconduct cases. The UK Government should lead on a co-produced framework with the UK Reproducibility Network, UKRIO and UK CORI, which sets out the roles and expectations for key actors … Read more
Government Response
The government rejects the recommendation to lead on a co-produced framework for responding to research misconduct cases, asserting that government should not investigate misconduct and that primary responsibility lies with research organisations.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
8 Recommendation Rejected
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Assess benefits of establishing an additional body to investigate research malpractice
The UK Government should assess the benefits that an additional body, set up to investigate malpractice, could bring to the UK’s research integrity governance architecture.
Government Response
The government rejects the recommendation to assess creating a new body for investigating research malpractice, stating it is not the government's role and that primary responsibility lies with research organisations.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
9 Recommendation Accepted
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Foster an environment where research integrity and reproducibility are championed across the community
Most reproducibility issues are, in the main, not the result of deliberate bad practice. Many of the incentives faced by individuals conducting research act against reproducibility. Whilst individuals must take responsibility for conducting work which prioritises robust analysis and transparency, … Read more
Government Response
The government partially accepts the recommendation, stating that UKRI is already supporting the research community in promoting integrity and reproducibility through various initiatives. These include shifting incentives via narrative CVs, changes to the REF process, hosting a research resource hub, and establishing a Good Practice Exchange.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
10 Recommendation Accepted in Part
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Require universities to model reproducibility culture and implement protected research time policy
Research institutions should model a culture of reproducibility by managing inordinate pressures on academics and encouraging the prioritisation of reproducibility in research outputs. This extends to encouraging openness around mistakes and their correction. In collaboration with the Higher Education Sector, … Read more
Government Response
The government partially accepts the recommendation, stating it does not require a formal response from the government on some aspects. It highlights UKRI's extensive existing work to shift incentives in the research system, including changes to the REF process and a £4.5 million commitment to the UK Reproducibility Network (UKRN), to promote research integrity and reproducibility.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
11 Recommendation Accepted in Part
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Develop dedicated funding and career paths for statistical experts and software developers
Statistical experts and software developers are insufficiently recognised and renumerated within the university research sector. Funders and universities should develop dedicated funding for the presence of statistical experts and software developers in research teams. In tandem, universities should work on … Read more
Government Response
The government partially accepts the recommendation, agreeing on the need for better recognition of statistical experts and software developers and citing existing UKRI initiatives. However, it states there is insufficient evidence that new dedicated funding streams would be more beneficial than integrating support into existing funds.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
12 Conclusion Acknowledged
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Implement stronger tests for software and statistical skills in research funding applications
Research funders should implement stronger tests for the presence of adequate software and statistical skills within research teams at the outset of a funding application. Where these skills are perceived to be lacking, UKRI should consider the feasibility and cost … Read more
Government Response
The government accepts the recommendation but provides no specific details on how it will implement stronger tests for software/statistical skills or consider a dedicated methodological support system for research teams.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
13 Recommendation Acknowledged
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Increase emphasis on reproducibility and integrity in university research education and training
Currently there is insufficient attention placed on reproducibility and research integrity training for university students and research professionals. Greater emphasis should be placed on the importance of reproducibility and research integrity in education and training at undergraduate, postgraduate and early … Read more
Government Response
The government accepts the recommendation, stating UKRI's Collective Talent Funding programme and existing Doctoral Training Centres already aim to address the need for high-quality training in research integrity and reproducibility. However, it does not commit to new specific actions regarding greater emphasis or routine production of replications in training.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
14 Recommendation Accepted
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Incorporate mandatory reproducibility training and professional development for researchers throughout their careers
Institutions should incorporate mandatory reproducibility training and professional development plans for researchers across the course of their career. (Paragraph 83) Reproducibility and Research Integrity 51
Government Response
The government accepts the recommendation, stating UKRI's Collective Talent Funding programme and its Doctoral Training Centres and Partnerships already aim to provide high-quality, consistent development and training for researchers across different career stages, supporting skill development for doctoral students.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
15 Recommendation Accepted in Part
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Implement a trial funding programme for 'slower' science and consult researchers on grant sufficiency
Short-term research grants place restrictive limitations on researchers, which can be to the detriment of research integrity and reproducibility. UKRI should consult with a representative sample of researchers to understand whether their grants allow them sufficient time and funding to … Read more
Government Response
The government partially accepts the recommendation, stating UKRI already funds a range of long-term projects and believes changing incentives is crucial beyond just grant length. While committed to continuing stakeholder work and experimenting with funding approaches, it does not explicitly commit to a new consultation with researchers or a dedicated trial funding programme for 'slower' science.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
16 Conclusion Rejected
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Impose a three-year minimum contract for all post-doctoral researchers in universities
Uncertainty in the academic job market, especially at earlier career stages, acts as a strong additional disincentive against the prioritisation of reproducibility by researchers. Research funders, including UKRI, should work to impose a three-year minimum contract for post-doctoral researchers in … Read more
Government Response
The government explicitly does not accept the recommendation to impose a three-year minimum contract for post-doctoral researchers in universities.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
17 Recommendation Accepted in Part
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Implement 100% open access policies for scientific outputs by UKRI and funders by 2025
The trend towards blanket open access in the communication of scientific outputs is positive. UKRI and other research funders should continue to implement open access policies until this figure reaches 100%, by the end of 2025 at the latest.
Government Response
The government partially accepts the recommendation, supporting the aspiration for 100% open access and detailing UKRI's existing policy and its expansion to monographs from January 2024. However, it notes complexities in implementation requiring action from various stakeholders, implying a lack of commitment to the specific 2025 deadline.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
18 Recommendation Accepted in Part
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Mandate researchers to share open-source data and code alongside all published outputs
Currently, research outputs are frequently published without an associated link through to their open-source data and code. This prevents other researchers assessing work for its reproducibility. In all bar the most exceptional ethical and legal situations, researchers should share their … Read more
Government Response
The UKRI open access policy seeks to ensure that research articles, monographs, book chapters and edited collections that acknowledge its funding are made freely accessible. UKRI welcomes and supports the aspiration for 100% of UK research articles to be open access.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
19 Recommendation Accepted in Part
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Mandate deposition of research data in open-access repositories and encourage FAIR principles
Journals should collectively encourage researchers to employ the FAIR (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reuse of digital assets) principles within their research and should mandate the deposition of research data in open- access repositories alongside the publication of research outputs. Read more
Government Response
The UKRI open access policy seeks to ensure that research articles, monographs, book chapters and edited collections that acknowledge its funding are made freely accessible. UKRI welcomes and supports the aspiration for 100% of UK research articles to be open access.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
20 Recommendation Acknowledged
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Continued emphasis on data management plans as a condition of research funding is necessary
We welcome UKRI’s use of data management plans. A continued emphasis on their importance as a condition of research funding is necessary.
Government Response
The government accepts, affirming that data management plans remain an important requirement and UKRI will be considering how to further enhance their utility as part of policy and funding application requirement reviews.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
21 Recommendation Accepted in Part
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Develop a pilot programme to fund replication studies, learning from NWO's model
Providing adequate funding for replication studies is an important precondition for ensuring researchers have the resources necessary to conduct them. UKRI should learn from its Dutch equivalent, NWO, by developing a pilot programme to fund replication studies. Read more
Government Response
The government partially accepts, stating UKRI will learn from NWO's pilot but does not commit to developing its own. They highlight existing funding mechanisms for replication studies and will consider increasing focus on metascience through a new caucus.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
22 Recommendation Deferred
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Review journal portfolios to ensure sufficient publication options for negative and confirmatory science
Aside from some notable exceptions, publishing routes for negative and confirmatory findings are not pursued thoroughly enough by the scholarly publishing industry. Publishers should review their journal portfolios to ensure that there are sufficient options for the publication of negative … Read more
Government Response
The government partially accepts, welcoming the concept of registered reports for enhancing reproducibility but stating that further evaluation of their costs and benefits is needed. UKRI will continue to facilitate discussions and contribute to addressing challenges in this area.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
23 Recommendation Accepted in Part
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Require publishers to support academics reporting issues and ensure timely research corrections and retractions
Publishers have a vital role in the maintenance of the scholarly record. Publishers should support academics who report issues with published research in their journals and should commit to timely publication of research error corrections and retractions where necessary—in our … Read more
Government Response
The government welcomes the support from the Committee for increasing the use of registered reports to enhance reproducibility, however further evaluation of the costs and benefits of registered report partnership models is needed.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
24 Conclusion Accepted
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Academic reward structures disincentivise research reproducibility and integrity.
Reward structures in academia disincentivise reproducibility by placing disproportionate value on secured funding and frequent publication in prestigious journals.
Government Response
The government partially accepts, explaining that UKRI has an extensive portfolio of ongoing work to shift incentives in the research system, including narrative CVs, changes to the REF, funding for the UK Reproducibility Network, and supporting the UK Committee on Research Integrity.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
25 Recommendation Accepted in Part
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Review Research Excellence Framework criteria, ensuring transparency and considering 'originality' removal.
The Future Research Assessment Programme (FRAP) is consulting on reforms for the assessment of UK higher education research. It should review the Research Excellence Framework assessment criteria to assure that transparency is a prerequisite of top- scoring research. It should … Read more
Government Response
The government partially accepts, stating that decisions on the next Research Excellence Framework (REF) fall to funding bodies, but the new framework will include assessment of integrity, openness, transparency, and research reproducibility, with detailed criteria developed in 2024.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
26 Recommendation Accepted in Part
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Assess researchers on broader academic contributions, mandating 'resume for researchers' format by 2025.
Researchers should be assessed on the broader contributions to their academic field, including time spent conducting voluntary peer review and promoting reproducibility and research integrity. Funders, led by UKRI, should move towards the exclusive use of the ‘resume for researchers’ … Read more
Government Response
The government partially accepts, declining to commit all funders to the exclusive use of the R4RI format by 2025. However, UKRI is committed to adopting R4RI across its own funding opportunities by the end of 2023 and is working with other funders to encourage broader adoption.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
27 Recommendation Accepted in Part
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Publish peer review comments to improve transparency and deter paper mills.
Peer review should not be viewed as a binary measure of quality versus unreliability for published papers. There is a wide range of competency, depth, and rigour in the analyses carried out during peer review as time-poor academics often do … Read more
Government Response
The government partially accepts the recommendation by welcoming the support for increasing the use of registered reports to enhance reproducibility, but notes that further evaluation of the costs and benefits of registered report partnership models is needed.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
28 Conclusion Acknowledged
Sixth Report - Reproducibility and…
Publishers and funders should offer a 'registered report partnership model' for research transparency.
The ‘registered report partnership model’ offers a good opportunity for researchers to have their methodologies peer reviewed at an early stage in the research process, allowing researchers to incorporate feedback into their research plans. Within this model, funding and the … Read more
Government Response
The government partially accepts the recommendation to offer a 'registered report partnership model' but provides no specific details on what aspects are accepted or how this will be implemented.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
View details
Government Response AI assessment · 28 of 21 classified
Accepted 4
Accepted in Part 11
Acknowledged 5
Deferred 4
Not Addressed 1
Rejected 3
Total 21 recs + 7 conclusions
Correspondence 1 letter
25 Feb 2022 Correspondence from Sir Patrick Vallance, Government Chief Scientific Adviser, to the Chair regarding guidance to implement the Concordat to Support Research Integrity in Government
Parliament page