Good Research Practice Awards 2023

Nominations are invited in four categories: 

1. Good research citizenship award 

Good research citizenship can take many forms and is not restricted to those in leadership and management roles or to “official” University activities. Good research citizenship includes, but is not limited to: 

• Contributing to formal and informal mentoring and support 
• Leading or contributing to projects to improve research practices 
• Increasing awareness and providing training in good research practices 
• Addressing issues of equity, diversity and inclusion in research 
• Supporting and engendering flourishing and diverse research teams  
• Performing actions which support greater inclusion in research activities of those who would not otherwise be able to contribute 
• Encouraging reflection on how we do research and develop our research culture 
• Commenting on drafts of applications, grants and papers, participating in practice interviews and practice presentations 
• Performing peer review, internal and external grant awarding panels  

We are interested in individuals or teams who have gone beyond the usual expectations of their role in contributing to research citizenship. 

2. Responsible research award 

Responsible research occurs where research is conducted in the public interest and researchers are aware that innovation is often ambiguous with unpredictable impact. Responsible research brings together researchers, funders and stakeholders (such as the public) and could involve elements, such as: 

• Co-creating research with diverse stakeholders 
• Public engagement and involvement of external communities, such as citizen scientists 
• Encouraging others to becomes involved in the research 
• Open and transparent processes and communications to demystify research 
• Adaptiveness to external feedback and experience 
• Sustainability (e.g., addressing the UN’s sustainability development goals) 
• Inclusive and ethical research practices to de-colonise science 

We are interested in individuals or teams who are practising responsible research and are creating opportunities for involvement, dialogue, engagement and exchange with communities beyond academia and the University of Edinburgh. 

3. Open research award 

Openness in research makes important contributions to participation, collaboration, dissemination, and reproducibility. Openness in research includes, but is not limited to: 

• Openness in research designs (e.g., study protocols)   
• Open access to publications  
• Open availability of study materials (e.g., questionnaires, reagents, psychological tests) 
• Open availability of study data such that it is findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable (“FAIR” data) 
• Openness of research platforms, tools and software 
• Openness of the conduct of research, both with scientific colleagues and with the wider public 
• Openness of grant funding applications, of peer review processes and of research and researcher evaluations 

We are interested in individuals or teams that have contributed to or promoted openness in research across multiple dimensions. 

4. Positive disruptor award 

As individuals and as an institution, we like to operate in familiar circumstances, and this can make us reluctant to embrace change. But disrupting our normal way of thinking about things can open opportunities to do things differently, to do things better. Positive disruptors in research don’t just point to problems but are able to see a different way of doing things, and to convince others to at least be open to the possibility of change. Key characteristics include, but are not limited to [1]:  

• Being able to influence and enthuse people  
• Being prepared to be knocked back, and to keep going  
• Not being put off when people ask why you’re wasting your time with irrelevant stuff  
• Believing in a different future, and having the courage to propose different ways of doing things – willing to try, fail and learn  
• Not just criticising, but proposing solutions  
• Knowing where internal rules have some flexibility, and when you are overstepping a mark and will fail to carry your colleagues  
• Knowing when to stop  

We are interested in individuals or teams that have improved our research practice, culture, or environment by challenging the status quo. 

[1] Derived from Ian Rodgers, reported here