"They Really Save Us From Ourselves" : Autism Researchers' Insights on Community Engagement and Ethics.

IF 2.1 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-05-18 DOI:10.1007/s11673-025-10511-x
Chloe Silverman, Michael Yudell, Amy Carroll-Scott
{"title":"\"They Really Save Us From Ourselves\" : Autism Researchers' Insights on Community Engagement and Ethics.","authors":"Chloe Silverman, Michael Yudell, Amy Carroll-Scott","doi":"10.1007/s11673-025-10511-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Autism research depends on the participation of autistic children and adults as well as their families, but researchers have not routinely involved autistic people in the planning or execution of research. Community-engaged research practices, standard in other fields such as areas of public health, are gaining acceptance in autism research, although some researchers and other stakeholders remain concerned about their appropriateness, feasibility, or utility. This study, part of a larger project on stakeholder views on the ethics of community engagement practices in autism research, examines researchers' ethical beliefs about community engagement. We find that the researchers with whom we spoke cite multiple specific ethical and epistemological benefits of these practices and relatively few risks. Barriers to community engagement are, in their view, often institutional and practical, including the longer timelines of community-engaged research, resistance or lack of comprehension on the part of funding organizations and grant reviewers, the need for additional resources to support appropriate compensation, and ensuring that community stakeholders and researchers have a shared understanding of terminology.</p>","PeriodicalId":50252,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","volume":" ","pages":"629-642"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13645854/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bioethical Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-025-10511-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/5/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Autism research depends on the participation of autistic children and adults as well as their families, but researchers have not routinely involved autistic people in the planning or execution of research. Community-engaged research practices, standard in other fields such as areas of public health, are gaining acceptance in autism research, although some researchers and other stakeholders remain concerned about their appropriateness, feasibility, or utility. This study, part of a larger project on stakeholder views on the ethics of community engagement practices in autism research, examines researchers' ethical beliefs about community engagement. We find that the researchers with whom we spoke cite multiple specific ethical and epistemological benefits of these practices and relatively few risks. Barriers to community engagement are, in their view, often institutional and practical, including the longer timelines of community-engaged research, resistance or lack of comprehension on the part of funding organizations and grant reviewers, the need for additional resources to support appropriate compensation, and ensuring that community stakeholders and researchers have a shared understanding of terminology.

“他们真的拯救了我们”:自闭症研究人员对社区参与和道德的见解。
自闭症研究依赖于自闭症儿童和成人以及他们的家庭的参与,但研究人员通常不会让自闭症患者参与研究的计划或执行。社区参与的研究实践作为公共卫生等其他领域的标准,在自闭症研究中越来越被接受,尽管一些研究人员和其他利益相关者仍对其适当性、可行性或实用性感到担忧。这项研究是一个关于利益相关者对自闭症研究中社区参与实践的伦理观点的更大项目的一部分,它检验了研究人员对社区参与的伦理信念。我们发现与我们交谈的研究人员引用了这些实践的多个特定伦理和认识论益处和相对较少的风险。在他们看来,社区参与的障碍通常是制度上的和实际的,包括社区参与研究的时间较长,资助组织和拨款审稿人的抵制或缺乏理解,需要额外的资源来支持适当的补偿,以及确保社区利益相关者和研究人员对术语有共同的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 医学-医学:伦理
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
67
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The JBI welcomes both reports of empirical research and articles that increase theoretical understanding of medicine and health care, the health professions and the biological sciences. The JBI is also open to critical reflections on medicine and conventional bioethics, the nature of health, illness and disability, the sources of ethics, the nature of ethical communities, and possible implications of new developments in science and technology for social and cultural life and human identity. We welcome contributions from perspectives that are less commonly published in existing journals in the field and reports of empirical research studies using both qualitative and quantitative methodologies. The JBI accepts contributions from authors working in or across disciplines including – but not limited to – the following: -philosophy- bioethics- economics- social theory- law- public health and epidemiology- anthropology- psychology- feminism- gay and lesbian studies- linguistics and discourse analysis- cultural studies- disability studies- history- literature and literary studies- environmental sciences- theology and religious studies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书