Investigation into the research of Milena Penkowa - Nyheder

2. Purpose and process of the investigation
This chapter explains the background for and purpose of the independent investigation into
the research of Milena Penkowa, by presenting extracts from the Terms of Reference
(section 2.1) for the investigation. In addition, the independent Panel who has completed
the investigation is presented (section 2.2). Finally the process and approach applied by the
Panel in the investigation are described (section 2.3).
2.1 Background for and purpose of the investigation
Background
The independent investigation into the research of Milena Penkowa was initiated by the
University of Copenhagen in summer 2011. According to the Terms of Reference (annex
2.1.1), the University found it necessary to organise the investigation due to doubts about
the honesty of the scientific work conducted by Milena Penkowa. The doubts were based on
suspicions of scientific dishonesty in Milena Penkowa’s research presented in specific
publications, which the University had reported in 2010 and 2011 to the Danish Committees
on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD), and in one case in 2011 to the Copenhagen Police.
The Terms of Reference thus say that: “The well-founded suspicion underlying the abovementioned
reports [to Police and DCSD] may raise doubts about the honesty of other
scientific work conducted by Milena Penkowa. Consequently, the University of Copenhagen
finds it necessary to organise an investigation into the honesty of the research forming the
basis of all Milena Penkowa’s published scientific articles.” The scientific articles reported to
the Copenhagen Police or DCSD before the start of the investigation are not included in the
Panel’s investigation.
Purpose
The investigation has several purposes according to the Terms of Reference, namely:
“The investigation will be conducted primarily to secure the sustained confidence in the
University's research and its researchers, but also out of regard for Milena Penkowa’s coauthors,
who may feel that their own research is subject to suspicion.”
and:
13