Principles
Guideline 1: Commitment to the general principlesGuideline 2: Professional ethicsGuideline 3: Organisational responsibility of heads of research institutionsGuideline 4: Responsibility of the heads of research work unitsGuideline 5: Dimensions of performance and assessment criteriaGuideline 6: OmbudspersonsGuideline 10: Legal and ethical frameworks, usage rightsGuideline 11: Methods and standardsGuideline 12: DocumentationGuideline 13: Providing public access to research resultsGuideline 14: AuthorshipGuideline 15: Publication mediumGuideline 16: Confidentiality and neutrality of review processes and discussionsGuideline 17: Archiving
Non-Compliance with Good Research Practice, Procedures
Guideline 18: Complainants and respondentsGuideline 19: Procedures in cases of alleged research misconductImplementation of the Guidelines
ForewordPreamblePrinzipienGuideline 1: Commitment to the general principlesGuideline 2: Professional ethicsGuideline 3: Organisational responsibility of heads of research institutionsGuideline 4: Responsibility of the heads of research work unitsGuideline 5: Dimensions of performance and assessment criteriaGuideline 6: OmbudspersonsForschungsprozessGuideline 7: Cross-phase quality assuranceGuideline 8: Stakeholders, responsibilities and rolesGuideline 9: Research designGuideline 10: Legal and ethical frameworks, usage rightsGuideline 11: Methods and standardsGuideline 12: DocumentationGuideline 13: Providing public access to research resultsGuideline 14: AuthorshipGuideline 15: Publication mediumGuideline 16: Confidentiality and neutrality of review processes and discussionsGuideline 17: ArchivingNichtbeachtung guter wissenschaftlicher Praxis, VerfahrenGuideline 18: Complainants and respondentsGuideline 19: Procedures in cases of alleged research misconductImplementation of the Guidelines
Order of authors in academic publications
14.05.2024 – The order of authors in academic publications must be based on clear criteria that reflect the practices within the relevant subject areas.
Comment on: GL14 (General)
Ghost Authorship and Ghostwriting
13.04.2023 – In research publications, all those persons who have made a genuine and identifiable contribution are to be named as authors.
Comment on: GL14 (General)
Academic publishing as a foundation and area of leverage for research assessment
25.11.2022 – The DFG has responded to developments in the field of academic publishing with its position paper “Academic Publishing as a Foundation and Area of Leverage for Research Assessment”.
Comment on: GL13 (Statements)
What to do in the case of an author passing away during the research work/publication process
22.04.2022 – The question of what to do in the case of an author passing away during the research work or publication process arises on the condition that the person has made a scientifically relevant contribution by the time of their death that entitles them to ...
Comment on: GL14 (General)
Recognition of individual achievements
03.12.2020 – Individual achievements should be adequately recognised.
Comment on: GL5 (General) , GL14 (General)
Further links on the subject of documentation
03.12.2020 – Sammlung externer Links zum Themenkomplex.
Comment on: GL12 (Link list)
Scientific achievement and evaluation criteria in the life sciences
03.12.2020 – The rapid availability of methods has greatly accelerated research in many areas of the life sciences. Intense competition, combined with the enormous pressure to publish, is difficult to reconcile with high quality standards. Quantitative publication ...
Comment on: GL5 (Life sciences)
Responsibilities of the head of a work unit in the life sciences
03.12.2020 – Planning projects and writing publications account for much of the research activity, as does reviewing and evaluating scientific publications and projects. The head of a work unit has a particular responsibility to provide researchers with the necessary ...
Comment on: GL4 (Life sciences)
Further links to performance dimensions and evaluation criteria
03.12.2020 – Collection of external links on the subject
Comment on: GL5 (Link list)
Further links on the subject of authorship
03.12.2020 – Sammlung externer Links zum Themenkomplex.
Comment on: GL14 (Link list)
Authorship in the life sciences
03.12.2020 – The attribution and origin of published contributions or findings must be clearly recognisable based on details of the individuals involved. This applies to both publications and research proposals. Due to the variety of research questions as well as ...
Comment on: GL14 (Life sciences)
Contributions to publications
03.12.2020 – In the engineering sciences, software design and prototype development are important contributions, too.
Comment on: GL14 (Engineering/engineering sciences)
Further links relating to legal and ethical frameworks, usage rights
03.12.2020 – Disclaimer: The selection of links provided here does not claim to be exhaustive. They are examples. The editors welcome suggestions for the inclusion of further examples.
Comment on: GL10 (Link list)
FAQ on authorship
03.12.2020 – frequently asked questions on authorship
Comment on: GL14 (faq)
Case study – Inadmissible “honorary authorships”
03.12.2020 – Examples of inadmissible honorary authorships
Comment on: GL14 (Practical examples)
Further links on making research results publicly accessible
03.12.2020 – Sammlung externer Links zum Themenkomplex.
Comment on: GL13 (Link list)
The role of software developers in publications
03.12.2020 – Software developers can be named as authors, providing the publication was only possible with their active participation.
Comment on: GL14 (General)
Author order in mathematics
03.12.2020 – In mathematical publications it has been common practice to date for the authors to appear in alphabetical order.
Comment on: GL14 (Natural sciences)
Example – “Conflict of authorship: a co-author disagrees with the order in which contributions are listed in publication”
03.12.2020 – There are three typical constellations here
Comment on: GL14 (Practical examples)
Case study – Conflict of authorship: Presumption of authorship
03.12.2020 – Dealing with conflicts of authorship: co-authors state that a person is claiming authorship to which they are not entitled. An example here is in the case of collaboration between the life sciences/natural sciences and the humanities: in the field of ...
Comment on: GL14 (Practical examples)
Authorship agreement
03.12.2020 – When preparing a publication in which several individuals are to be involved, it is advisable to set down in writing early on who will make what contribution.
Comment on: GL14 (General)
Contributions that do not establish authorship
03.12.2020 – Examples of contributions that do not justify authorship.
Comment on: GL14 (Practical examples)
Authorship criteria / negative catalogue
03.12.2020 – Due to the differing practices and cultures in the various academic fields and communities, developing a universally valid and all-encompassing definition of authorship poses a considerable challenge.
Comment on: GL14 (General)
Definition of a “genuine contribution”
03.12.2020 – The requirements in Guideline 14 of the Code (“genuine, identifiable contribution”) have been extended as compared to the definition of authorship in Recommendation 11 of the DFG memorandum (“substantial contribution”). An author is now defined as ...
Comment on: GL14 (General)
Publication media in the life sciences
03.12.2020 – In the life sciences, results are often published in specialist journals and there is a peer review process for this purpose. Prompt availability and open access to published content is vital to scientific progress in the life sciences: this helps ensure ...
Comment on: GL15 (Life sciences)
Further links to publication media
03.12.2020 – Sammlung externer Links zum Themenkomplex.
Comment on: GL15 (Link list)