Code of Conduct
To ensure the integrity, fairness, and international credibility of the REF Pakistan assessment, all reviewers must adhere to a strict Code of Conduct. The framework is built on the principle that judgements must be impartial, evidence-based, and free from personal or institutional bias.
1. Reviewer Code of Conduct
All appointed reviewers (Academic, Impact, and Methodology experts) are bound by the following ethical obligations:
- Confidentiality: Maintain absolute confidentiality regarding all submission materials, panel discussions, and preliminary scores. Do not discuss submissions outside the formal panel meeting.
- Objectivity: Provide evidence-based scoring. Ratings must be derived from the provided evidence pack and Handbook rubrics, not personal narratives or institutional reputation.
- Integrity: Refrain from using information gained during the review process for personal or professional advantage.
- Duty to Declare: Immediately notify the Secretariat if a new conflict of interest arises during the assessment cycle.
2. Defining Conflict of Interest (COI)
A conflict exists if a reviewer’s prior or current relationship with a submitting institution or individual could be perceived to influence their judgement.
Category | Examples of Major Conflicts |
Employment | Current or recent employment (within the last 3 years) at the submitting HEI. |
Supervision | Acting as a PhD supervisor or being supervised by a lead researcher in the submission. |
Collaboration | Active research collaboration or joint grant applications with the unit being assessed. |
Personal | Close family relationship or significant personal connection to the authors. |
Financial | Significant financial interest, such as consultancies or shared patents, with the unit. |
3. Disclosure and Management Procedure
REF Pakistan uses a formal “Three-Step” process to manage conflicts:
- Initial Declaration: Reviewers must sign a formal Conflict-of-Interest Declaration Form before receiving any submission materials.
- Secretariat Register: All declarations are recorded in a central Conflict Register. The Secretariat uses this to ensure reviewers are never assigned to evaluate their own institution or close collaborators.
- Recusal: If a minor conflict is identified during a panel discussion, the reviewer must declare it and may be asked to leave the room (or virtual meeting) while that specific unit is scored.
4. Scoring Integrity Safeguards
The process includes built-in checks to prevent bias from affecting the final institutional standing:
- Double-Blind Elements: Reviewers work independently in Stage 1 to prevent one expert from influencing the other’s initial score.
- Chair Oversight: The Panel Chair signs off on the Scoring Integrity of every unit, confirming that all rules were followed and no unmanaged conflicts influenced the result.
- National Audit: Random sampling and cross-panel checks are used to identify unusually strict or generous scoring patterns that may indicate underlying bias.
Failure to comply with these guidelines may result in immediate removal from the REF Pakistan panel and the voiding of associated scores.