A research note: Using ethics memoranda of understanding in community-based research

Q1 Social Sciences
Celina Su
{"title":"A research note: Using ethics memoranda of understanding in community-based research","authors":"Celina Su","doi":"10.1177/20597991221101564","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Because university-based research ethics committees tend to focus on ethical dilemmas common in biomedical research in laboratory settings, a growing number of researchers and community-based organizations have articulated the need for alternatives to such committees in community-based research. While there is a robust academic literature on ethical dilemmas in such social research, there remains a need for practical tools to use in collaborations between communities and researchers. In this research note, I present potential memoranda of understanding between academics and communities that might be used when formal community-based research ethics committees do not exist. I focus on two hypothetical scenarios, in which a researcher works with an established group or organization, and in which a researcher is just one of several researchers working with the same community. I forward a framework that conceptualizes researchers as critical friends of communities in their research, highlighting questions of emotional labor, community benefits, and what I call generative conflicts. I hope that researchers and community-based organizations find this note to be a useful starting point for constructive dialogs on reciprocity in community-based research.","PeriodicalId":32579,"journal":{"name":"Methodological Innovations","volume":"15 1","pages":"178 - 190"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Methodological Innovations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20597991221101564","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Because university-based research ethics committees tend to focus on ethical dilemmas common in biomedical research in laboratory settings, a growing number of researchers and community-based organizations have articulated the need for alternatives to such committees in community-based research. While there is a robust academic literature on ethical dilemmas in such social research, there remains a need for practical tools to use in collaborations between communities and researchers. In this research note, I present potential memoranda of understanding between academics and communities that might be used when formal community-based research ethics committees do not exist. I focus on two hypothetical scenarios, in which a researcher works with an established group or organization, and in which a researcher is just one of several researchers working with the same community. I forward a framework that conceptualizes researchers as critical friends of communities in their research, highlighting questions of emotional labor, community benefits, and what I call generative conflicts. I hope that researchers and community-based organizations find this note to be a useful starting point for constructive dialogs on reciprocity in community-based research.
研究说明:在基于社区的研究中使用伦理谅解备忘录
由于大学研究伦理委员会倾向于关注实验室生物医学研究中常见的伦理困境,越来越多的研究人员和社区组织明确表示,在社区研究中,需要替代此类委员会。尽管有大量关于此类社会研究中伦理困境的学术文献,但仍需要在社区和研究人员之间的合作中使用实用工具。在这篇研究报告中,我介绍了学术界和社区之间的潜在谅解备忘录,当没有正式的社区研究伦理委员会时,可以使用这些备忘录。我关注两种假设场景,一种是研究人员与一个既定的团体或组织合作,另一种是一名研究人员只是与同一社区合作的几个研究人员之一。我提出了一个框架,将研究人员概念化为研究中社区的关键朋友,强调情感劳动、社区利益和我所说的生成性冲突等问题。我希望研究人员和社区组织发现,这份说明是在社区研究中就互惠问题进行建设性对话的有用起点。
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
Methodological Innovations
Methodological Innovations Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
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