ForewordPreamble

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: Ombudspersons

Research Process

Guideline 7: Cross-phase quality assuranceGuideline 8: Stakeholders, responsibilities and rolesGuideline 9: Research design

 

Guideline 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
Keyword Index
Back to last page
| Print

Comment on:

The following comment refers to this/these guideline(s)

Guideline 7

Cross-phase quality assurance

Researchers carry out each step of the research process lege artis. When research findings are made publicly available (in the narrower sense of pub- lication, but also in a broader sense through other communication channels), the quality assurance mechanisms used are always explained. This applies especially when new methods are developed.

Explanations:

Continuous quality assurance during the research process includes, in particular, compliance with subject-specific standards and established methods, processes such as equipment calibration, the collection, processing and analysis of research data, the selection and use of research software, software development and programming, and the keeping of laboratory notebooks.

If researchers have made their findings publicly available and subsequently become aware of inconsistencies or errors in them, they make the necessary corrections. If the inconsistencies or errors constitute grounds for retracting a publication, the researchers will promptly request the publisher, infrastructure provider, etc. to correct or retract the publication and make a corresponding announcement. The same applies if researchers are made aware of such inconsistencies or errors by third parties.

The origin of the data, organisms, materials and software used in the research process is disclosed and the reuse of data is clearly indicated; original sources are cited. The nature and the scope of research data generated during the research process are described. Research data are handled in accordance with the requirements of the relevant subject area. The source code of publicly available software must be persistent, citable and documented. Depending on the particular subject area, it is an essential part of quality assurance that results or findings can be replicated or confirmed by other researchers (for example with the aid of a detailed description of materials and methods).

Quality assurance in the development of research software

Guideline 7 requires researchers to ensure quality throughout the entire research process – comprehensively and across all phases. The development, programming and use of research software are of particular importance here. The DFG defines research software as software that is created during the research process or for a research purpose, including such elements as source code, scripts and executable files. Its purposes include the collection, analysis, simulation, processing, presentation or use of observational and measurement data, digitised texts, images, films, audio sources, objects etc.; the software may also be used to generate scientific models, control scientific instrumentation or optimise procedures.

The individual software solutions needed to address research questions are as specific as the questions themselves, and solutions are often used that are developed especially for the project at hand. The DFG has established five guiding principles to ensure the quality of research software development:

1. Software development and standards: Software development should follow best practice standards and define all development steps in advance (authorship, versioning, licensing, etc.).

2. Software quality: In addition to general software engineering standards, subject-specific quality criteria should be defined that are aligned with the FAIR principles for research software (FAIR4RS principles) and established quality frameworks.

3. Accessibility and documentation: Source code, workflows, and functionality must be clearly documented and made available so as to ensure verifiability and reproducibility.

4. Citeability and reusability: Research software should be developed in a way that enables reuse for other research projects. In the case of newly developed software, the focus should be on maximum machine findability and open licensing.

5. Software sustainability: Sustainability should be ensured based on plans for maintenance and functional development, as well as through the use of infrastructures/repositories and the establishment of active communities.

Effective quality assurance in research software development generally includes software documentation, version management, persistent identifiers, metadata, a licence, and also additional elements, depending on the type of research software.

See also

Handling of Research Software in the DFG’s Funding Activities
Barker, Chue Hong, Katz et al. (2022): Introducing the FAIR Principles for research software,
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-022-01710-x
Anzt H, Bach F, Druskat S et al. An environment for sustainable research software in Germa-ny and beyond: current state, open challenges, and call for action. F1000Research 2021, 9:295
https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.23224.2

The comment belongs to the following categories:

GL7 (General)

Keywords:

documentationresearch softwarelege artis/according to professional standardsquality assurance

|