174 extractive question-and-answer pairs built from Final GARP Guilding Document Design.cdr, published by ugc.gov.in. Every answer is a verbatim span of text the source prints, and each row carries the passage it sits in, its offset in that passage, the source quote, the page and the location in the document, so any row can be checked against the original. 123 of the 174 pairs (70.7%) are explanatory questions and 51 restate a figure. 100.00% of rows pass the corpus quality gate.
Use the API URL with your free DD token in notebooks, scripts, and pipelines.
https://www.desidata.in/api/datasets/good-academic-research-practices-question-and-answer-dataset/downloadDataset downloads are free. For Python or API downloads, sign in once and create a free DD token; set it as DD_TOKEN or save it in your notebook's secrets. Requests are linked to your account so your download history and counts stay accurate.
# One-time install: pip install desidata
# Set DD_TOKEN in your environment first (create a free token in Profile & settings).
import desidata
df = desidata.load("good-academic-research-practices-question-and-answer-dataset")
df.head()Sign in with Google to download.
Usable for analysis, but expect some cleaning before you rely on it.
Vice-Chancellor Handbook - Question and Answer Dataset
Economy · 939 rows
Life Skills (Jeevan Kaushal) 2019 course - Question and Answer Dataset
Economy · 164 rows
MMTTP Guidelines - Question and Answer Dataset
Economy · 85 rows
Learning Outcomes-Based Curriculum Framework - Question and Answer Dataset
Economy · 74 rows
Annual Report 2015-16 by agriwelfare.gov.in - Question and Answer Dataset
Economy · 1,013 rows
Higher Education in India - Question and Answer Dataset
Economy · 1,594 rows
Gender Policy of NABARD - Question and Answer Dataset
Economy · 14 rows
ICAR Annual Report 2025-26 - Question and Answer Dataset
Economy · 1,101 rows
First 10 of 174 rows
| question | answer | context | answer_start | question_type | knowledge_quality_score | source_quote | source_page | source_location | confidence | validation_status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| What is the purpose of the guidance covered in the compilation? | the Indian academic research communi- ty to be at par with international benchma- rks for research quality, integrity, and excellence | This compilati- on also covers guidance from several intern - ationally and nationally recognized model documents on best practices and framewo- rks of research. The guidance will help prep- are the Indian academic research communi- ty to be at par with international benchma- rks for research quality, integrity, and excellence. I congratulate the Vice Chairman, UGC, the knowledge partner Clarivate, and the expert group committee members who have work- ed tirelessly to conceptualize and compile this document. | 195 | definition | 1.000 | The guidance will help prep- are the Indian academic research communi- ty to be at par with international benchma- rks for research quality, integrity, and excellence. | 4 | page=4,block=0 | 0.850 | valid |
| What is essential for a good research design? | having a well- documented plan outlining the objectives, roles, and responsibilities | The proposed research should address questions, the answers to which will contribute new knowl- edge, solve challenges, correct errors in the existing literature, or develop new methods for conducting such research. A good research design involves having a well- documented plan outlining the objectives, roles, and responsibilities. Research builds upon the work of others, who must be Good Research Practice | 248 | definition | 1.000 | A good research design involves having a well- documented plan outlining the objectives, roles, and responsibilities. | 8 | page=8,block=4 | 0.700 | valid |
| What is the value of good documentation during research? | keeping track of one's research progress | properly identified, and their contributions appropriately acknowledged. A good litera- ture review helps do that. It locates the pro- posed research in the broader research landscape, provides insights into identifying data sources and research methods, and lays out a rigorous and systematic approach to analysing and synthesizing the evidence to support the research claims. Conducting Research: Good documentation in the form of labora- tory notes, research journals, or field notes is valuable for keeping track of one's research progress. This record of the processes and procedures, including information on data sources, their quality, storage, and retrieval is not only necessary to document proper research practice but also to address ques- tions should concerns be expressed about potential misconduct or veracity of results. | 503 | definition | 1.000 | Conducting Research: Good documentation in the form of labora- tory notes, research journals, or field notes is valuable for keeping track of one's research progress. | 9 | page=9,block=0 | 0.700 | valid |
| What does the Office of Research Integrity promote to ensure honesty in research? | Transparency: Honesty is promoted through transparency in developing, undertaking, reviewing, reporting, and communicating research in a fair, comprehensive, and unbiased fashion | The Office of Research Integrity, ORI, must promote the following values in the conduct and management of research: 4 Ethics: Research is conducted in an ethical manner ensuring dignity, rights, safety, and privacy within the researcher ecosys tem. 4 Rigour: Research ensures high quality design, reliable data, the appropriate use of methods, rigorous and careful analysis, and transparent reporting and interpreta- tion of the results. 4 Relevance: In the endeavour of expanding the knowledge-base and understanding the environment and ecosystem, research advances the short-and long-term goals of science and society. 4 Transparency: Honesty is promoted through transparency in developing, undertaking, reviewing, reporting, and communicating research in a fair, comprehensive, and unbiased fashion (All European Academies, 2017). 4 Respect: The process of research is aligned with the norms and traditions of society and its cultural heritage, with respect for colleagues, research participants, and the environment. 4 Impartiality: Objectivity and lack of bias are the core principles of research. | 623 | definition | 1.000 | |||||
| What helps research align with the objectives of science and society? | Relevance: In the endeavour of expanding the knowledge-base and understanding the environment and ecosystem, research advances the short-and long-term goals of science and society. | The Office of Research Integrity, ORI, must promote the following values in the conduct and management of research: 4 Ethics: Research is conducted in an ethical manner ensuring dignity, rights, safety, and privacy within the researcher ecosys tem. 4 Rigour: Research ensures high quality design, reliable data, the appropriate use of methods, rigorous and careful analysis, and transparent reporting and interpreta- tion of the results. 4 Relevance: In the endeavour of expanding the knowledge-base and understanding the environment and ecosystem, research advances the short-and long-term goals of science and society. 4 Transparency: Honesty is promoted through transparency in developing, undertaking, reviewing, reporting, and communicating research in a fair, comprehensive, and unbiased fashion (All European Academies, 2017). 4 Respect: The process of research is aligned with the norms and traditions of society and its cultural heritage, with respect for colleagues, research participants, and the environment. 4 Impartiality: Objectivity and lack of bias are the core principles of research. | 440 | definition | 1.000 | |||||
| What is the purpose of the prevalent model of the scientific method in research? | reducing research problems into manageable sub-problems | The prevalent model of the “scientific method” of reducing research problems into manageable sub-problems that has been so successful in advancing research in the physical and natural sciences and engineering does not always transfer effectively to addressing research problems in the social sciences and the humanities (Bhattacherjee, 2012; Donovan and Hoover, 2013; Latour and Woolgar, 1979). Social science research tends to leverage theory- building wherein a researcher observes events, establishes the relationships bet- ween events and associated factors influenc- ing the events, locates the common factor, verifies the explanation in various contexts to generalize the explanation and finally, con- firms the explanation as a theory. Theory- building is perhaps the most difficult aspect of social science research because of the | 50 | definition | 1.000 | The prevalent model of the “scientific method” of reducing research problems into manageable sub-problems that has been so successful in advancing research in the physical and natural sciences and engineering does not always transfer effectively to addressing research problems in the social sciences and the humanities (Bhattacherjee, 2012; Donovan and Hoover, 2013; Latour and Woolgar, 1979). | ||||
| What is the definition of research misconduct provided by the US Office of Science and Technology Policy? | fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results | According to the US Office of Science and Technology Policy, “Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results” (Federal Research Misconduct Policy, 2000). The terms fabrication, falsifica- tion, and plagiarism are defined as: “Fabrication: Making up data or results. 4 Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately repre- sented in the research record. 4 Plagiarism: The appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit (The Office of Research Integrity, 2020a). | 96 | definition | 1.000 | According to the US Office of Science and Technology Policy, “Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results” (Federal Research Misconduct Policy, 2000). | 22 | page=22,block=1 | ||
| What is the meaning of fabrication in research misconduct? | Making up data or results | According to the US Office of Science and Technology Policy, “Research misconduct is defined as fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing, performing, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results” (Federal Research Misconduct Policy, 2000). The terms fabrication, falsifica- tion, and plagiarism are defined as: “Fabrication: Making up data or results. 4 Falsification: Manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately repre- sented in the research record. 4 Plagiarism: The appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit (The Office of Research Integrity, 2020a). | 350 | definition | 1.000 | The terms fabrication, falsifica- tion, and plagiarism are defined as: “Fabrication: Making up data or results. | 22 | page=22,block=1 | 0.700 | valid |
| How are predatory journals and publishers defined in the consensus definition? | false or misleading information, deviation from best editorial and publication practices, a lack of transparency, and/or the use of aggressive and indiscriminate solicitation practices | The recent increase in academic journals with little or no editorial standards to ensure research quality is becoming one of the more flagrant examples of academic misconduct, apart from the commercial exploitation of the research community. A 'consensus' definition of a predatory journal is, “Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship and are characterized by false or misleading information, deviation from best editorial and publication practices, a lack of transparency, and/or the use of aggressive and indiscriminate solicitation practices” (Grudniewicz et al., 2019). Researchers should avoid predatory journals both as an outlet for their manuscripts and as cited references in their research. | 427 | definition | 1.000 | A 'consensus' definition of a predatory journal is, “Predatory journals and publishers are entities that prioritize self-interest at the expense of scholarship and are characterized by false or misleading information, deviation from best editorial and publication practices, a lack of transparency, and/or the use of aggressive and indiscriminate solicitation practices” (Grudniewicz et al., 2019). | ||||
| What does the JIF represent in the context of academic publishing? | an important and objective measure of a journal’s contribu- tion to scholarly communication | The JIF provides an important and objective measure of a journal’s contribu- tion to scholarly communication. A confluence of motivations can result in various forms of malpractice ranging from biased reviews arising from conflicts of interest between reviewers and authors, citation coercion, and inflated author and journal self-citations. Building a strong culture of research integrity along with constant vigilance is necessary to curtail such misconduct. that is not enough. Here again, the ORI has an important role to play in educating and training researchers at all stages of their career. Education and training can be built upon guidance from COPE, the REAPPRAISED checklist, and the Johnson Report on scholarly and scientific publishing (Johnson, et al., 2018), among others (See Appendix 1). | 17 | definition | 1.000 | The JIF provides an important and objective measure of a journal’s contribu- tion to scholarly communication. | 30 | page=30,block=1 | 0.700 | valid |
Read straight from the file — download or use the API URL for the full dataset.
| 4 Transparency: Honesty is promoted through transparency in developing, undertaking, reviewing, reporting, and communicating research in a fair, comprehensive, and unbiased fashion (All European Academies, 2017). |
| 14 |
| page=14,block=0 |
| 0.700 |
| valid |
| 4 Relevance: In the endeavour of expanding the knowledge-base and understanding the environment and ecosystem, research advances the short-and long-term goals of science and society. 4 Transparency: Honesty is promoted through transparency in developing, undertaking, reviewing, reporting, and communicating research in a fair, comprehensive, and unbiased fashion (All European Academies, 2017). |
| 14 |
| page=14,block=0 |
| 0.700 |
| valid |
| 19 |
| page=19,block=1 |
| 0.700 |
| valid |
| 0.700 |
| valid |
| 26 |
| page=26,block=1 |
| 0.700 |
| valid |