Research Ethics最新文献_第10页

Ethical approval: none sought. How discourse analysts report ethical issues around publicly available online data 伦理认可:无人寻求。话语分析师如何报告围绕公开在线数据的道德问题

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2021-01-19 DOI: 10.1177/1747016120988767

Wyke J P Stommel, Lynn de Rijk

{"title":"Ethical approval: none sought. How discourse analysts report ethical issues around publicly available online data","authors":"Wyke J P Stommel, Lynn de Rijk","doi":"10.1177/1747016120988767","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016120988767","url":null,"abstract":"Although ethical guidelines for doing Internet research are available, most prominently those of the Association of Internet Researchers (www.aoir.org), ethical decision-making for research on publicly available, naturally-occurring data remains a major challenge. As researchers might also turn to others to inform their decisions, this article reviews recent research papers on publicly available, online data. Research involving forums such as Facebook pages, Twitter, YouTube, news comments, blogs, etc. is examined to see how authors report ethical considerations and how they quote these data. We included 132 articles published in discourse analysis-oriented journals between January 2017 and February 2020. Roughly one third of the articles (85 out of 132) did not discuss ethical issues, mostly claiming the data were publicly available. Quotations nevertheless tended to be anonymized, although retrievability of posts was generally not taken into account. In those articles in which ethical concerns were reported, related decisions appeared to vary substantially. In most cases it was argued that informed consent was not required. Similarly, approval from research ethics committees was mostly regarded unnecessary. Other ethical issues like consideration of users’ expectations and intentions, freedom of choice, possible harm, sensitive topics, and vulnerable groups were rarely discussed in the articles. We argue for increased attention to ethical issues and legal aspects in discourse analytic articles involving online data beyond mentioning general concerns. Instead, we argue for more involvement of users/participants in ethical decision-making, for consideration of retrievability of posts and for a role for journal editors.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"30 1","pages":"275 - 297"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2021-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76668221","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 27

Unethical governance: capacity legislation and the exclusion of people diagnosed with dementias from research 不道德的治理:能力立法和将诊断为痴呆症的人排除在研究之外

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2020-12-17 DOI: 10.1177/1747016120982023

J. Fletcher

{"title":"Unethical governance: capacity legislation and the exclusion of people diagnosed with dementias from research","authors":"J. Fletcher","doi":"10.1177/1747016120982023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016120982023","url":null,"abstract":"This paper considers the potential for the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) of England and Wales to incentivise the exclusion of people with dementia from research. The MCA is intended to standardise and safeguard the inclusion of people with cognitive impairments in research. This entails various procedural requirements, which in pressurised research contexts can lead researchers to exclude people with dementia as a means of simplifying bureaucratic constraints. I consider the risks of an ‘unethical ethics’, wherein procedural ethics indirectly causes the exclusion of people with dementia from research, undermining historic successes toward increased inclusivity. I suggest several solutions, including enhanced sensitivity to impairments and shifting the burden of proof from justifying inclusion to justifying exclusion. The paper responds to the ‘ethics creep’ tradition in procedural ethics, and critical appraisals of capacity legislation in dementia research. This approach recognises that institutional research ethics is itself a major ethical concern and can unwittingly beget unethical practices. Dementia researchers must be alert to such unethical ethics.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"35 1","pages":"298 - 308"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2020-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85153470","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 14

Community-based health care providers as research participant recruitment gatekeepers: ethical and legal issues in a real-world case example 社区卫生保健提供者作为研究参与者招募看门人:现实世界案例中的道德和法律问题

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2020-12-10 DOI: 10.1177/1747016120980560

Karen L. Celedonia, Michael W. Valenti, Marcelo Corrales Compagnucci, M. Lowery Wilson

引用次数: 2

Ethical and practical considerations in HIV drug trial closure: perspectives of research staff in Uganda 艾滋病毒药物试验结束的伦理和实际考虑:乌干达研究人员的观点

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2020-11-16 DOI: 10.1177/17470161211030971

Sylivia Nalubega, Karen Cox, H. Mugerwa, C. Evans

{"title":"Ethical and practical considerations in HIV drug trial closure: perspectives of research staff in Uganda","authors":"Sylivia Nalubega, Karen Cox, H. Mugerwa, C. Evans","doi":"10.1177/17470161211030971","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161211030971","url":null,"abstract":"There is a gap in evidence regarding how research trial closure processes are managed to ensure continuity of HIV care for HIV positive participants following trial closure within low income settings. This research aimed to establish how research staff in Uganda understood and practised post-trial care for HIV positive trial participants. A grounded theory study was conducted using in-depth individual interviews and focus group discussions with 22 research staff from three different trials in Uganda. The results indicated that researchers engaged in three main activities to support trial participants, including: (i) preparing for post-trial care, which included instituting trial closure guidelines, planning necessary resources, and informing trial participants about post-trial care; (ii) facilitating participants during trial exit by engaging in psychological and practical support activities and (iii) providing follow up care and support for participants after trial exit, to respond to the needs of trial participants which often arose after trial exit. This study established a need for a holistic approach to post-trial-care of HIV positive trial participants in Uganda, and the need to engage multiple stakeholders including ethics authorities.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"74 7 1","pages":"423 - 434"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2020-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84131596","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Publish or be ethical? Publishing pressure and scientific misconduct in research 出版还是道德?出版压力和科研不端行为

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2020-11-04 DOI: 10.1177/1747016120980562

M. Paruzel-Czachura, Lidia Baran, Zbigniew Spendel

{"title":"Publish or be ethical? Publishing pressure and scientific misconduct in research","authors":"M. Paruzel-Czachura, Lidia Baran, Zbigniew Spendel","doi":"10.1177/1747016120980562","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016120980562","url":null,"abstract":"The paper reports two studies exploring the relationship between scholars’ self-reported publication pressure and their self-reported scientific misconduct in research. In Study 1 the participants (N = 423) were scholars representing various disciplines from one big university in Poland. In Study 2 the participants (N = 31) were exclusively members of the management, such as dean, director, etc. from the same university. In Study 1 the most common reported form of scientific misconduct was honorary authorship. The majority of researchers (71%) reported that they had not violated ethical standards in the past; 3% admitted to scientific misconduct; 51% reported being were aware of colleagues’ scientific misconduct. A small positive correlation between perceived publication pressure and intention to engage in scientific misconduct in the future was found. In Study 2 more than half of the management (52%) reported being aware of researchers’ dishonest practices, the most frequent one of these being honorary authorship. As many as 71% of the participants report observing publication pressure in their subordinates. The primary conclusions are: (1) most scholars are convinced of their morality and predict that they will behave morally in the future; (2) scientific misconduct, particularly minor offenses such as honorary authorship, is frequently observed both by researchers (particularly in their colleagues) and by their managers; (3) researchers experiencing publication pressure report a willingness to engage in scientific misconduct in the future.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"17 1","pages":"375 - 397"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2020-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90528159","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 16

Moral injury and the need to carry out ethically responsible research 道德伤害和开展伦理责任研究的必要性

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2020-11-02 DOI: 10.1177/1747016120969743

V. Williamson, D. Murphy, C. Castro, E. Vermetten, R. Jetly, N. Greenberg

{"title":"Moral injury and the need to carry out ethically responsible research","authors":"V. Williamson, D. Murphy, C. Castro, E. Vermetten, R. Jetly, N. Greenberg","doi":"10.1177/1747016120969743","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016120969743","url":null,"abstract":"The need for research to advance scientific understanding must be balanced with ensuring the rights and wellbeing of participants are safeguarded, with some research topics posing more ethical quandaries for researchers than others. Moral injury is one such topic. Exposure to potentially morally injurious experiences can lead to significant distress, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and selfinjury. In this article, we discuss how the rapid expansion of research in the field of moral injury could threaten the wellbeing, dignity and integrity of participants. We also examine key guidance for carrying out ethically responsible research with participants’ rights to self-determination, confidentiality, non-maleficence and beneficence discussed in relation to the study of moral injury. We describe how investigations of moral injury are likely to pose several challenges for researchers including managing disclosures of potentially illegal acts, the risk of harm that repeated questioning about guilt and shame may pose to participant wellbeing in longitudinal studies, as well as the possible negative impact of exposure to vicarious trauma on researchers themselves. Finally, we offer several practical recommendations that researchers, research ethics committees and other regulatory bodies can take to protect participant rights, maximise the potential benefits of research outputs and ensure the field continues to expand in an ethically responsible way.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"1 1","pages":"135 - 142"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2020-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75822307","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 8

Understanding and attitudes of the Jordanian public about clinical research ethics 约旦公众对临床研究伦理的理解和态度

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2020-10-21 DOI: 10.1177/1747016120966779

M. Ababneh, S. Al‐Azzam, K. Alzoubi, Abeer M. Rababa’h, S. A. Al Demour

引用次数: 0

Online educational research with middle adolescent populations: Ethical considerations and recommendations 青少年群体的在线教育研究:伦理考虑和建议

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2020-10-08 DOI: 10.1177/1747016120963160

Erin Mackenzie, Nathan Berger, K. Holmes, M. Walker

引用次数: 4

Unconsented acknowledgments as a form of authorship abuse: What can be done about it? 未经同意的致谢是一种滥用作者身份的形式:对此我们能做些什么?

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2020-08-30 DOI: 10.1177/1747016120952516

Mladen Koljatic

引用次数: 3

The responsibility of knowledge: Identifying and reporting students with evidence of psychological distress in large-scale school-based studies 知识的责任:在大规模校本研究中识别和报告有心理困扰证据的学生

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2020-08-30 DOI: 10.1177/1747016120952511

Margaret L. Kern, H. Cahill, L. Morrish, A. Farrelly, Keren Shlezinger, Hayley K. Jach

{"title":"The responsibility of knowledge: Identifying and reporting students with evidence of psychological distress in large-scale school-based studies","authors":"Margaret L. Kern, H. Cahill, L. Morrish, A. Farrelly, Keren Shlezinger, Hayley K. Jach","doi":"10.1177/1747016120952511","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016120952511","url":null,"abstract":"The use of psychometric tools to investigate the impact of school-based wellbeing programs raises a number of ethical issues around students’ rights, confidentiality and protection. Researchers have explicit ethical obligations to protect participants from potential psychological harms, but guidance is needed for effectively navigating disclosure of identifiable confidential information that indicates signs of psychological distress. Drawing on a large-scale study examining student, school, and system-based factors that impact the implementation of a school-based social and emotional learning program, we describe patterns of distress attained from quantitative and qualitative questions and describe the process that we evolved to monitor and disclose sensitive mental health information, providing one example of how researchers might effectively address the responsibilities that emerge when collecting sensitive information from students within an education system. The patterns and processes that emerged illustrate that the inclusion of mental distress information can elicit important insights, but also brings responsibilities for minimising risks and maximising benefits.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"69 1","pages":"193 - 216"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2020-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79152490","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3