Extra question re knowledge security and safety researchers

[djhcapel]

Could we add an extra question under the question about ethical reflection?

Zijn er kwesties rondom kennisveiligheid en/of de veiligheid van de onderzoeker(s)? ja/nee, zo ja, licht toe.

[tymees]

Where would this question be asked?

[djhcapel]

Under the question about ethical reflection?

[tymees]

Right.... Sorry, long day

[djhcapel]

Discussed in GC meeting: make this two separate questions:

• Zijn er kwesties rondom de veiligheid van de onderzoeker(s) en deelnemers? ja/nee, zo ja, licht toe.

• Zijn er kwesties rondom kennisveiligheid? ja/nee, zo ja, licht toe.

[djhcapel]

Helptekst kennisveiligheid:
Kennisveiligheid gaat over het tijdig signaleren en mitigeren van veiligheidsrisico’s bij wetenschappelijk onderzoek. Voor meer informatie, zie https://intranet.uu.nl/kennisbank/kennisveiligheid.

Knowledge security is about the detection and mitigation of security risks in academic research in a timely manner. For more information, see https://intranet.uu.nl/en/knowledgebase/knowledge-security.

[djhcapel]

I just noticed that at the end of the form, there are already some related questions about risks, misleading etc. I will discuss this issue with the chairs and let you know.

[djhcapel]

Will come back to this.

[djhcapel]

See email of 26 February with attached the revised text and some additional questions.

[EdoStorm96]

So, as of PR #625, all these questions are asked on study end, which means researchers are asked these new questions for every study/trajectory. Today we decided this is mostly fine, but that the question about knowledge security and the question about researcher safety should be asked about the entire proposal/application. This could be on the first page, the submit page, or a new page. We still are not 100% sure about this. @djhcapel is goig to get back to us about this.

[djhcapel]

I have discussed the location of the following questions with the chairs of the FEtC-H and we agree that these two questions should appear at the end, as questions about the entire research, not just one trajectory:

• Zijn er kwesties rondom kennisveiligheid? ja/nee/twijfel, (bij ja/twijfel: licht toe).
• Zijn er kwesties rondom de veiligheid van / risico’s voor de onderzoeker(s) ja/nee/twijfel, (bij ja/twijfel: licht toe).

Should we discuss where exactly these should appear?

[EdoStorm96]

So I was thinking:

• we rename the page now named "Overzicht" aka study_end to "Overzicht traject".
• then we add a page after the study named "afronding trajecten" or "complete trajectories". Here we then ask the questions about knowledge security and researcher safety.

What do you think of that @djhcapel?

[djhcapel]

Yes, the page that is now entitled "Overzicht en eigen beoordeling van het gehele onderzoek" should be entitled "Overzicht en eigen beoordeling Traject [x]'.

I think the extra page should be added at the end of 'Trajectories', in the menu 'Overzicht gehele onderzoek', so before 'Formulieren'. Is that possible?

And can this page include brief info on the Trajectories as well?

[EdoStorm96]

What would you like to see included in the overview?
I guess we could do a small table with:

• Trajectory 1 | [title] | [research type(s)]
• Trajectory 2 | [title] | [research type(s)]

Maybe add age groups?

Also, do you have an idea for a small text on this page? Right now I have:
"Onderstaande vragen hebben betrekking op het gehele onderzoek."

[djhcapel]

I think the suggested overview will do. This should not be too long, because otherwise the questions will not get the attention they deserve.

The suggested text is also fine.