Research Ethics最新文献_第8页

Can research ethics codes be a conduit for justice? An examination of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander guidelines in Australia 研究伦理规范能成为实现正义的渠道吗?对澳大利亚土著居民和托雷斯海峡岛民指南的审查

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2021-10-25 DOI: 10.1177/17470161211053199

D. Zion, Richard Matthews

{"title":"Can research ethics codes be a conduit for justice? An examination of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander guidelines in Australia","authors":"D. Zion, Richard Matthews","doi":"10.1177/17470161211053199","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161211053199","url":null,"abstract":"Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia, have historically experienced research as another means of colonialization and oppression. Although there are existing frameworks, guidelines and policies in place that respond to this history, the risk of exploitation and oppression arising from research still raises challenging ethical questions. Since the 1990s the National Health and Medical Research Council in Australia has developed specific sets of guidelines that govern research with these populations in an attempt to redress injustices of the past. The current guidelines: Ethical Conduct in Research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples and Communities: Guidelines for Researchers and Stakeholders, 2018, emphasis six core values which are bound together by “spirit and integrity.” The values are reflected through respect for cultural inheritance, and genuine negotiation of partnerships between researchers, other stakeholders, and communities. We examine whether these guidelines can lead to research and research practices that redress some of the ongoing traumas of colonialization and racism. We draw upon Margaret Urban Walker’s formulation of restorative justice, based upon her “pragmatics of repair” which relies upon “voice, validation and vindication” and at its core, the restoration of relationships.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"39 1","pages":"51 - 63"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2021-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88905022","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

Navigating conflict between research ethics and online platform terms and conditions: a reflective account 导航研究伦理与在线平台条款和条件之间的冲突:一个反思的帐户

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2021-10-12 DOI: 10.1177/17470161211045526

S. Chua

{"title":"Navigating conflict between research ethics and online platform terms and conditions: a reflective account","authors":"S. Chua","doi":"10.1177/17470161211045526","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161211045526","url":null,"abstract":"Internet users’ comments in online spaces have attracted researchers’ attention in recent years. Although this data is typically publicly available, its use requires careful consideration so as to not cause harm to the users, while complying with the terms and conditions (Ts & Cs) of the online spaces. However, the Ts & Cs and researchers’ ethical considerations may sometimes be in conflict. I faced such a conflict when I conducted discourse analysis of online discussions that were sourced from a public online learning platform owned by a private company. In this article, I reflect on how I navigated the Ts & Cs and copyright law, taking users’ likely expectations into consideration when deciding whether to seek informed consent and anonymize content. I employed an ‘attribution with anonymization’ method to acknowledge users for their comments while safeguarding their confidentiality. Given the variety of online spaces and research methods, ethical decision-making must be a contextualized process that requires researchers to consider the nature of the online platform and the potential experience of the users, rather than simply following guidelines or Ts & Cs.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"33 1","pages":"39 - 50"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2021-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89853643","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: 5

A modest proposal to the peer review process: a collaborative and interdisciplinary approach in the assessment of scholarly communication 对同行评议过程的适度建议:学术交流评估中的合作和跨学科方法

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2021-10-10 DOI: 10.1177/17470161211051230

A. Hoffman

引用次数: 4

CORRIGENDUM to “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:对此可以做些什么?”的更正。

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2021-10-01 DOI: 10.1177/17470161211037906

引用次数: 0

A critical self-reflexive account of a privileged researcher in a complicated setting: Kakuma refugee camp 一个在复杂环境下的特权研究者的批判性自我反思:卡库马难民营

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2021-10-01 DOI: 10.1177/17470161211037386

Neil Bilotta

引用次数: 3

A phenomenographic study of scientists’ beliefs about the causes of scientists’ research misconduct 科学家对科学家科研不端行为原因的信念的现象研究

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2021-10-01 DOI: 10.1177/17470161211042658

Aidan C. Cairns, Caleb L. Linville, Tyler Garcia, B. Bridges, Scott Tanona, J. Herington, James T. Laverty

{"title":"A phenomenographic study of scientists’ beliefs about the causes of scientists’ research misconduct","authors":"Aidan C. Cairns, Caleb L. Linville, Tyler Garcia, B. Bridges, Scott Tanona, J. Herington, James T. Laverty","doi":"10.1177/17470161211042658","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161211042658","url":null,"abstract":"When scientists act unethically, their actions can cause harm to participants, undermine knowledge creation, and discredit the scientific community. Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) training is one of the main ways institutions try to prevent scientists from acting unethically. However, this only addresses the problem if scientists value the training, and if the problem stems from ignorance. This study looks at what scientists think causes unethical behavior in science, with the hopes of improving RCR training by shaping it based on the views of the targeted audience (n = 14 scientists). Previous studies have surveyed scientists about what they believe causes unethical behavior using pre-defined response items. This study uses a qualitative research methodology to elicit scientists’ beliefs without predefining the range of responses. The data for this phenomenographic study were collected from interviews which presented ethical case studies and asked subjects how they would respond to those situations. Categories and subcategories were created to organize their reasonings. This work will inform the development of future methods for preventing unethical behavior in research.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"22 1","pages":"501 - 521"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74448076","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: 4

‘Grey areas’: ethical challenges posed by social media-enabled recruitment and online data collection in cross-border, social science research “灰色地带”:在跨境社会科学研究中，社交媒体招聘和在线数据收集带来的道德挑战

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2021-09-22 DOI: 10.1177/17470161211045557

Sara Bamdad, D. Finaughty, Sarah E. Johns

{"title":"‘Grey areas’: ethical challenges posed by social media-enabled recruitment and online data collection in cross-border, social science research","authors":"Sara Bamdad, D. Finaughty, Sarah E. Johns","doi":"10.1177/17470161211045557","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161211045557","url":null,"abstract":"Are social science, cross-border research projects, where recruitment and data collection are carried out remotely (e.g. through social media and online platforms), required to follow similar ethical and data-sharing procedures as ‘on-the-ground’ studies that use traditional means of recruitment and participant engagement? This article reflects on our experience of dealing with this question when we (multi-national but UK based researchers) had to switch to online data collection due to the restrictions posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, such as the inability to travel or work in person with local communities and collaborators. Using social media platforms and online data collection when conducting research brings many advantages, such as being able to communicate remotely but directly with gatekeepers and collaborators, and in reaching potential participants on a global scale. However, neither the guidelines and advice for conducting ethically sound internet-based research, nor the academic literature focussed on building equitable research partnerships between the Global North and the Global South, offer much information regarding the ethical concerns, or address the grey areas, posed by this type of digital and distanced transnational research. In our experience, conducting research remotely made negotiations of access very challenging due to the politics of positionality between Global North and South researchers, lack of clarity on ethical processes and (mis)perceptions of gatekeepers who we could not meet in person. We hope the reflections on, and discussion of, our experience encourage deliberation on the present ethical challenges posed by online and social-media-disseminated data collection, particularly in cross-border circumstances.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"2015 1","pages":"24 - 38"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2021-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73463810","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: 2

Reshaping the review of consent so we might improve participant choice 重塑对同意的审查，这样我们就可以改善参与者的选择

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2021-09-15 DOI: 10.1177/17470161211043703

H. Davies

{"title":"Reshaping the review of consent so we might improve participant choice","authors":"H. Davies","doi":"10.1177/17470161211043703","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161211043703","url":null,"abstract":"Consent is one necessary foundation for ethical research and it’s one of the research ethics committee’s major roles to ensure that the consent process meets acceptable standards. Although on Oxford ‘A’ REC (an NHS Research Ethics Committee based in the UK) we’ve been impressed by the thought and work put into this aspect of research ethics, we’ve continued to have concerns about the suitability and effectiveness of consent processes in supporting decision making, particularly for clinical trials. There’s poor understanding of what people want to help them decide; current processes don’t provide the best grounding for informed consent and there’s inadequate public involvement. We’ve also found a lack of proportionality with researchers failing to adapt consent procedures in proportion to the burdens and consequences of the study. As a result, people are often not best helped to make an informed choice when asked to join a research study. To address these concerns, we considered how we might improve this aspect of research ethics review. Recognising the central importance of the dialogue between the volunteer and researcher, we’ve drawn up a model or flowchart of what we deem good consent practice, proposing consent should be built around four simple steps: Step 1: Introducing the study and the choices: helping the potential participants get an overview of the proposal and introducing the key issues. Step 2: Explaining all the details of the study using the detailed Participant Information Sheet. Step 3: After a gap, if necessary, reviewing and checking understanding. Step 4: Reaching agreement and recording consent. These steps, we believe, could help all involved and this article lays out ways we might improve participant choice while complying with accepted principles and current regulations.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"47 1","pages":"3 - 12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2021-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80581191","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

Recruiting pupils for a school-based eye study in Nigeria: Trust and informed consent concerns 尼日利亚为学校眼科研究招募学生:信任和知情同意问题

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2021-09-08 DOI: 10.1177/17470161211045772

F. Maduka-Okafor, O. Okoye, N. Oguego, N. Udeh, A. Aghaji, O. Okoye, I. Ezegwui, E. Nwobi, E. Ezugwu, E. Onwasigwe, R. Umeh, Chiamaka Aneji

{"title":"Recruiting pupils for a school-based eye study in Nigeria: Trust and informed consent concerns","authors":"F. Maduka-Okafor, O. Okoye, N. Oguego, N. Udeh, A. Aghaji, O. Okoye, I. Ezegwui, E. Nwobi, E. Ezugwu, E. Onwasigwe, R. Umeh, Chiamaka Aneji","doi":"10.1177/17470161211045772","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470161211045772","url":null,"abstract":"School-based research presents ethical challenges, especially with respect to informed consent. The manner in which pupils and their parents respond to an invitation to participate in research is likely to depend on several factors, including the level of trust between them and the researchers. This paper describes our recruitment and consent process for a school-based eye study in Nigeria. In the course of our study, a particular governmental incident helped to fuel public mistrust in governmental programs and posed a potential threat to our recruitment efforts. The recruitment and consent process included series of advocacy visits to stakeholders in the education sector, highly interactive briefing and health talk sessions in schools, use of telephone services as a medium for information dissemination, age-appropriate study information, parental consent, and pupil assent. Of the 6598 pupils provided with study information, 5723 returned parental consent forms. There were 69 cases of pupils who dissented despite having parental consent. The two leading concerns for the parents/guardians were the rumors regarding a military/governmental-sponsored health campaign and the side-effects of the dilating eye-drops. Nevertheless, our high level of recruitment suggests our recruitment and consent process was successful in assuaging fears for the vast majority of pupils and their parents.","PeriodicalId":38096,"journal":{"name":"Research Ethics","volume":"61 1","pages":"13 - 23"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2021-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87399274","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

Research integrity: emphasising our commitment 研究诚信:强调我们的承诺

IF 1.7

Research Ethics Pub Date : 2021-07-01 DOI: 10.1177/17470161211028740

S. Nicholls

引用次数: 1