Research Ethics最新文献_第2页

Who reviews what you do at the zoo? Considerations for research ethics with captive exotic animals 谁评论你在动物园做的事?对圈养外来动物研究伦理的考虑

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-25 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231188615

E. Fernandez, Todd J. McWhorter

引用次数: 1

Reconceptualizing participant vulnerability in Scholarship of Teaching and Learning research: exploring the perspectives of health faculty students in Aotearoa New Zealand 重新定义教学和学习研究中的参与者脆弱性:探索新西兰奥特罗阿卫生学院学生的观点

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-25 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231188720

A. Lees, R. Godbold, S. Walters

{"title":"Reconceptualizing participant vulnerability in Scholarship of Teaching and Learning research: exploring the perspectives of health faculty students in Aotearoa New Zealand","authors":"A. Lees, R. Godbold, S. Walters","doi":"10.1177/17470161231188720","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231188720","url":null,"abstract":"While the need to protect vulnerable research participants is universal, conceptual challenges with the notion of vulnerability may result in the under or over-protection of participants. Ethics review bodies making assumptions about who is vulnerable and in what circumstance can be viewed as paternalistic if they do not consider participant viewpoints. Our study focuses on participant vulnerability in Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) research. We aim to illuminate students’ views on participant vulnerability to contribute to critical analysis of the role and processes of ethics review. Additionally, we aim to highlight the importance of seeking the views of participant communities, especially in research environments beyond ethics review’s medical origins. Thirty-four students from a health-related faculty at a university in Aotearoa New Zealand, participated in five focus groups. Participants discussed factors affecting their potential participation in research drawing upon a series of vignettes based on examples of published SoTL projects. Themes, generated using reflexive thematic analysis, built a participant-informed picture of vulnerability. Findings indicate that students do not generally consider themselves vulnerable and instead consider participation in SoTL research through an agentic lens. Students expect that participation will be voluntary, not negatively impact their grades, and not single them out so that others could judge them. Our study also highlights the value students place on relationships with one another and teaching staff and the implications these have for SoTL research participation and future professional practice. This research challenges research ethics committees to think further about vulnerability in the context of SoTL whilst highlighting the importance of providing opportunities for research participants more broadly to explore and vocalize their views as members of participant communities.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"117 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84931430","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

Shifting attitudes on animal ‘ownership’: Ethical implications for welfare research and practice terminology 对动物“所有权”态度的转变:福利研究和实践术语的伦理含义

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-11 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231186060

Julia Henning, Ana Goncalves Costa, E. Fernandez

引用次数: 0

Ethical considerations and dilemmas for the researcher and for families in home-based research: A case for situated ethics 基于家庭的研究中研究者和家庭的伦理考虑和困境:一个情境伦理的案例

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-03 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231181860

I. Palaiologou, Alice V. Brown

{"title":"Ethical considerations and dilemmas for the researcher and for families in home-based research: A case for situated ethics","authors":"I. Palaiologou, Alice V. Brown","doi":"10.1177/17470161231181860","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231181860","url":null,"abstract":"When researching with or about families in home-based research, there are numerous unexpected ethical issues that can emerge, particularly in qualitative research. This paper is based on reflective accounts of four homed-based research projects, two in the UK and two Australia, which examined ethical dilemmas identified when engaged in home-based research with young children. Using a synergy of ecocultural theory and Foucauldian ideas of Heterotopia as theoretical conceptualisations, the authors employed reflective lenses to guide their approach, and examine dilemmas and complexities when conducting research in the home. We argue that, to address ethical dilemmas, researchers need to problematise and reflect upon the nature of respectful approaches and the ethical implications of their behaviours. We conclude that, although ethical codes are valuable when researching families at home, researchers should plan for and forefront their methodological approaches in ways that are family-centred, whilst also framed by practices that are ethical, respectful and reflective to the situated contexts of family’s ecologies and heterotopias.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"38 1","pages":"519 - 535"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80122773","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

Erratum to “Using wearable cameras to investigate health-related daily life experiences: A literature review of precautions and risks in empirical studies” “使用可穿戴相机调查与健康相关的日常生活体验:实证研究中的预防措施和风险的文献综述”的勘误

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231159486

引用次数: 0

Opinions and attitudes of research ethics committees in Arab countries in the Middle East and North African region toward ethical issues involving biobank research 中东北非地区阿拉伯国家研究伦理委员会对涉及生物样本库研究的伦理问题的看法和态度

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-06-29 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231185510

Zeinab Mohammed, F. Abdelgawad, M. Ahram, M. E. Ibrahim, A. Elgamri, Ehsan B. Gamel, L. Adarmouch, K. Rhazi, S. Abd ElHafeez, H. Silverman

引用次数: 0

Agreement of farm animal behaviour and welfare studies with the ARRIVE Essential 10 农场动物行为和福利研究与抵达基本10的协议

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-06-29 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231183100

J. Calderón-Amor, Daniela Luna, T. Tadich

{"title":"Agreement of farm animal behaviour and welfare studies with the ARRIVE Essential 10","authors":"J. Calderón-Amor, Daniela Luna, T. Tadich","doi":"10.1177/17470161231183100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231183100","url":null,"abstract":"The inclusion of animals in research studies involves a great responsibility to ensure animal welfare within the relevant ethical and legal frameworks. This study aimed to review compliance with the ARRIVE Essential 10 requirements and the ethical oversight of animal behaviour and welfare studies in farm animals. Three journals and a total of 133 articles were reviewed for compliance with the ARRIVE Essential 10 items and criteria. Each article obtained a final score according to whether or not each criterion was met within each item. Likewise, ethical declaration in each article was recorded. Chi-square test and linear models were built to assess associations between the ethical statement presentation and the final ARRIVE Essential 10 score with the country, the species, and the journal. We found that 15% of the articles did not present an ethical statement. The journal with the highest impact factor and the countries of the Global South presented an ethical statement more frequently. Regarding the Essential 10, the item with the lowest agreement score was ‘Blinding’ and the one with the highest agreement was ‘Outcome Measures’. Also, significant differences were found between journals in terms of the Essential 10 score. Essential 10 provides relevant information that allows reviewers and readers to identify possible welfare risks and the validity of the results in animal welfare science publications.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"31 1","pages":"373 - 389"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74741590","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

Ethical standards for research on marine mammals 海洋哺乳动物研究的伦理标准

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-06-22 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231182066

V. Papastavrou, C. Ryan

{"title":"Ethical standards for research on marine mammals","authors":"V. Papastavrou, C. Ryan","doi":"10.1177/17470161231182066","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231182066","url":null,"abstract":"Conducting marine mammal research can raise several important ethical issues. For example, the continuation of whaling for commercial purposes despite the international moratorium provides opportunities for scientists to obtain data and tissue samples. In 2021 we analysed 35 peer-reviewed papers reporting research based on collaborations with Icelandic whalers. Results highlighted little consideration or understanding of the legal and ethical issues associated with the deliberate killing of whales amongst those researchers, funding bodies, universities and journals involved. Ethical statements were rarely provided. Those that were written were incomplete. Whilst research using whaling data may seem acceptable to some, it often becomes hard to justify when subject to scrutiny by the media and the public. Thus, there is a particular danger of reputational harm for early career researchers who may become unwittingly involved in such activities. Here we also consider the broader variety of ethical issues raised by non-lethal research (both historical and recent) on marine mammals including tagging and biopsy. We discuss instances where study animals were harmed or even killed and where the public mistook tags for harpoons. Without clear guidelines, reviewers and journal editors are put in an impossible position when considering whether to reject papers on ethical grounds. We propose that for such studies, universities, funders, journals, and permit issuers must require ethical assessments and that journals more effectively implement their existing policies on publishing ethical statements. The professional marine mammal societies need to work together to produce modern ethical guidance. Such guidance should require transparency in the provenance of data and samples while including advice on law, welfare issues, involvement of local scientists, and offshoring. Furthermore, it should require appraisal of and justification for the absolute necessity of invasive procedures. As is already the case in biomedical disciplines, ethical statements should be required in marine mammal science.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"18 1","pages":"390 - 408"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84899526","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: 1

Let’s do better: Improving research ethics knowledge, practice and systems of oversight 做得更好:完善科研伦理知识、实践和监管体系

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-06-22 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231183840

E. Dove, K. Chatfield

引用次数: 0

The ethics of disclosing the use of artificial intelligence tools in writing scholarly manuscripts 披露使用人工智能工具撰写学术手稿的伦理问题

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2023-06-15 DOI: 10.1177/17470161231180449

Mohammad Hosseini, D. Resnik, Kristi L Holmes

{"title":"The ethics of disclosing the use of artificial intelligence tools in writing scholarly manuscripts","authors":"Mohammad Hosseini, D. Resnik, Kristi L Holmes","doi":"10.1177/17470161231180449","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161231180449","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we discuss ethical issues related to using and disclosing artificial intelligence (AI) tools, such as ChatGPT and other systems based on large language models (LLMs), to write or edit scholarly manuscripts. Some journals, such as Science, have banned the use of LLMs because of the ethical problems they raise concerning responsible authorship. We argue that this is not a reasonable response to the moral conundrums created by the use of LLMs because bans are unenforceable and would encourage undisclosed use of LLMs. Furthermore, LLMs can be useful in writing, reviewing and editing text, and promote equity in science. Others have argued that LLMs should be mentioned in the acknowledgments since they do not meet all the authorship criteria. We argue that naming LLMs as authors or mentioning them in the acknowledgments are both inappropriate forms of recognition because LLMs do not have free will and therefore cannot be held morally or legally responsible for what they do. Tools in general, and software in particular, are usually cited in-text, followed by being mentioned in the references. We provide suggestions to improve APA Style for referencing ChatGPT to specifically indicate the contributor who used LLMs (because interactions are stored on personal user accounts), the used version and model (because the same version could use different language models and generate dissimilar responses, e.g., ChatGPT May 12 Version GPT3.5 or GPT4), and the time of usage (because LLMs evolve fast and generate dissimilar responses over time). We recommend that researchers who use LLMs: (1) disclose their use in the introduction or methods section to transparently describe details such as used prompts and note which parts of the text are affected, (2) use in-text citations and references (to recognize their used applications and improve findability and indexing), and (3) record and submit their relevant interactions with LLMs as supplementary material or appendices.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"31 1","pages":"449 - 465"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2023-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73171712","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: 13