The Australian Academy of Science and for-profit journal giant Springer Nature are conducting a national survey

It’s a re-run of the survey conducted last year, which was apparently so successful the partners want more responses. The goal is to “understand the perceptions of Australian-based researchers towards good research practices and research integrity, and to assess the current levels of training in research practices, data management and research integrity in Australian institutions.”

The survey asks responders for their definition of research integrity and to rate 12 attributes of research design on a five-point scale, followed by a range of questions about how research integrity is communicated and managed at their (unnamed) institution.

There are also questions about open access, whether responders’ institutions, “recommend data repositories for open sharing” and if they “actively encourages open access publishing” – which are undoubtedly relevant to research integrity, just in ways that escape CMM.

The academy and publisher will use the results “to help develop directives for change to be shared across the sector.” Which raises another question – since when do commercial publishers issue directives to researchers.