HomeConflict of Interest Guidelines for the Review of Appointment Cases at Academia Sinica
Approved on November 29, 2012
Amended on September 1, 2016
Amended on March 7, 2018
Amended on January 28, 2022
Amended on September 1, 2016
Amended on March 7, 2018
Amended on January 28, 2022
- During peer review of appointment cases for researchers of all ranks at Academia Sinica Institutes, Preparatory Offices and Research Centers, the following conflicts should be avoided:
- Review committee members (including the convener) and reviewers having the following relationship with the candidate:
- Candidate's spouse or relative within the third degree of kinship by blood or marriage.
- Candidate's master's thesis or doctoral dissertation advisor, or advisor for candidate's postdoctoral research carried out in the past five years.
- The convener of the review committee and reviewers have co-authored works or carried out jointly-executed projects with the candidate in the past five years.
- Review committee members (including the convener) and reviewers having the following relationship with the candidate:
- In case of special research fields where it proves difficult to find suitable reviewers, scholars with qualifications described in Subparagraph 2 of Article 1 may be invited to serve, provided that all co-authored works and jointly-executed projects with the candidate are clearly declared. The appointment committee should state the reasons for selecting such reviewers in its overall report. Before casting votes at the Institute Council, Research Center Council or Preparatory Office Council, these circumstances should be clearly stated to individuals with voting rights. After the case has been passed, the unit supervisor should also state the reason for selecting such reviewers in the comments section of the Director's Referral Form and submit it to the affiliated Divisional Appointment and Promotion Committee for review.
- The AS Institute or Research Center Director should serve as an ex officio member or convener of the appointment review committee per the Institute or Research Center's requirements. However, under circumstances described in Article 1, the Director should recuse themselves from serving as member or convener, and appoint an agent on their behalf.
