As an economist, you have gotten your hands on someone else’s enormous mountain of data, which a business has made available. You know that with this data you can deliver a series of great articles. After the first publication, a colleague from the US asks if he can take a look at your rough data. What do you do? Share? With the risk that the researcher publishes follow-up articles based on ‘your’ data?

A recently founded journal has asked if they could publish your research but you wonder if the editor concerned will carry out a scientific check (peer review). Do you accept the request? Or do you offer your text to another journal, which does follow the scientific guidelines?

You are commissioned by a company to investigate whether a drink provides energy. The results are without a shadow of a doubt: there is no connection between the drink and energy levels. However, you estimate that there is a good chance of follow-up assignments. Do you adapt your formulations in the journal so that you can stay in the race?

You want to interview refugees and migrants on their journey, but they must – as is good scientific practice – first give permission and sign a form. Many refugees however, will never put their signature on anything. How do you deal with that? Also, what if a participant asks for money? Can you always refuse?

You are on an assessment committee as a professor and you feel that the quality of the thesis concerned is below standard. At the same time, the five articles meet the required scientific standard, because they have all been published. Do you make a point of it or not?