Practicing Integrity

To be effective, the norms outlined in The Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (DCCRI) should be ingrained in academic culture and identities (Merton 1973, Deem 2004, Henkel 2005, Shore & Wright 2015). Yet increasing “projectification” of academic work and changes in research funding regimes (Hellström & Husted 2004, Ylijoki 2014, Jongbloed & Vossensteyn 2001, Wright 2014) may work counter to the DCCRI’s demands and norms of integrity. The proposed project seeks to understand how (well) the Danish research community “learns” responsible research prac-tices in universities and in university colleges (UCs, which are “new” to academic research). We will explore how academics’ integrity practices are formed and balanced with incentives such as publication bonuses, drives for research collaboration and funding arrangements at three levels: in-dividually, by researchers in their day-to-day academic practice; institutionally, in the education of early career researchers; and organisationally by leaders, managers and supervisors, who operate as translators in local sensemaking and sensegiving processes (Degn 2013, 2015). This will shed light on how Danish researchers navigate the principles and incentives that influence integrity in their academic practice.