Objective

Award Categories

Eligibility

Jury

Objective

• have made substantial contributions to fostering research integrity through outstanding measures that increase the quality and reliability of research, e.g. by improving transparency, access to research results (‘Open Science’), overcoming the fragmentation of research (‘Team science’);

• have developed and/or implemented quality-improving interventions, governance and policies;

• have delivered groundbreaking research on research to identify opportunities for improving research practice, have generated evidence for potential interventions, and have developed metrics and policies that incentivize the adoption of best possible research practices;

• have developed innovative approaches that foster research on research integrity, have conducted and designed novel measures or programs preventing misconduct and safeguarding validity and reliability in science and research;

• have identified and addressed systemic factors leading to improved research integrity and more responsible research;

• have performed or supported studies on the reproducibility of scientific results;

• have made a significant contribution to the teaching of good research practice;

• have identified research standards and incentives that directly or indirectly constrain the quality of research (e.g. reliance on purely quantitative output measures) and have designed more adequate means to assess the quality of research and researchers;

• have demonstrated exceptional integrity when facing difficult circumstances and/or conflicts of interest;

• have significantly contributed to increasing the diversity of research by taking into view aspects such as gender, race/ethnicity, geography, career stage, etc.;

• guarantee the long-term archiving of data and publication (generation-spanning archives);

Nomination and Application

• Nominators are expected to think about a diverse set of nominations, including gender, race/ethnicity, geography, and career stage.

• The emphasis should generally be on the nominee’s recent work.

• Nominators, nominees and applicants are expected to ensure they are fully aware and comply with the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity as defined by the European Federation of Academies of Sciences and Humanities (see link below).

• Most nominees are individuals, but in some cases, teams may be nominated. When considering nominating a team, only nominate primary members who have made original and vital contributions.

• Applications may be submitted on behalf of a team by any of its members.

• The award recipient, including each individual member, may not be an employee of the Einstein Foundation, a judge involved in the award process, or any other party involved in the design, production, execution, or distribution of the award, or the immediate family member of such a party (i.e. a spouse, parent, step-parent, or step-child). Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, advisors who will provide comments on the applications or nominations are not eligible to participate in the award process. Self-nominations are not permitted, nor are nominations from immediate family members.

• To nominate or apply for this award, nominators and applicants may access the nomination/application platform where they can provide all the necessary information. If it is not possible to submit an online application, please contact Ulrike Pannasch for further instruction.

• All nominations and applications must be received by the applicable deadline. Nominations and applications submitted after a posted award deadline will not be considered.

• All final entries must be submitted through the award website following the instructions stated there.

• The Einstein Foundation reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to (a) cancel, suspend, or modify the award process, and/or (b) not award prizes if no entries are deemed worthy.

Requirements

• Letter of nomination describing the candidate's work and why he or she should be selected for the award (no more than two (2) A4 pages).

• Suggested citation: a 50-word summary stating why the nominee should be considered for this award.

• CV of the nominee or CVs of the team of nominees; each may be no more than two (2) A4 pages long.

• Bibliography: a list of no more than twelve (12) of the nominee´s publications that are most relevant for this award. In the case of a team of nominees, please submit lists for each individual. Publications without access restrictions are particularly welcome.

• Letter of support: up to three (3) letters of support can be submitted. Letters must be written by eminent experts from institutions external to both the nominator's and the nominee’s institution, and each should be no longer than one (1) A4 page. Furthermore, up to two (2) letters of recommendation from the nominee’s former trainees are required, illustrating the nominee’s mentorship and how the nominee impacted their careers. Each should be no longer than one (1) A4 page.

• Letter of application: a brief description of the institution’s or organization's collective efforts to promote quality in research (no more than two (2) A4 pages). If available, please include outcomes, statistics, testimonials, and other data that exemplify how your efforts have promoted quality in research.

• Suggested citation: a 50-word summary stating why the institution or organization should be considered for this award.

• Letter of support: up to three (3) letters of support can be submitted. Letters must be written by eminent experts from institutions external to the applying institution or organization itself. Each should be no longer than one (1) A4 page.

• Letter of nomination: a brief description of the institution’s or organization's collective efforts to promote quality in research (no more than two (2) A4 pages) why it should be selected for the award. If available, please include outcomes, statistics, testimonials, and other data that exemplify how their efforts have promoted quality in research.

• Suggested citation: a 50-word summary stating why the institution or organization should be considered for this award.

• Letter of support: up to three (3) letters of support can be submitted. Letters must be written by eminent experts from institutions external to the nominated institution or organization itself. Each should be no longer than one (1) A4 page.

• Project proposal: a description of the planned project and its anticipated outcome (no more than two (2) A4 pages).

• Suggested citation: a 50-word summary stating why the application should be considered for this award.

• CV or CVs of the applicant or team of applicants, each no more than two (2) A4 pages long.

• Bibliography: list of the five most important publications or a list of up to five major achievements relevant for this application. Publications without access restrictions are particularly welcome. You may also include preprints.

• Letter of motivation: a brief statement (no longer than one (1) A4 page) on the motivation for this project.

Selection

Jury