ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesArts

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

(Australia) Outrage over minister cancelling research grants – University World News (Geoff Maslen | October 2018)0

Posted by Admin in on October 30, 2018
 

Revelations that a former federal education minister interfered in a competitive research grants process and cancelled 11 humanities and social sciences projects, costed at more than AU$4 million (US$2.8 million), has generated outrage across Australia’s higher education sector.

The decision by former education minister Simon Birmingham last year and early this year to override recommendations from the Australian Research Council (ARC) was belatedly revealed in federal parliament on Thursday night.

ARC officials were being questioned during a Senate hearing and explained how Birmingham had stepped in to reject the council’s decision that 11 of the research projects be funded.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

Ethical Regulation and Visual Methods: Making Visual Research Impossible or Developing Good Practice? (Papers: Rose Wiles et al 2012)0

Posted by Admin in on October 4, 2016
 

Abstract

The ethical regulation of social research in the UK has been steadily increasing over the last decade or so and comprises a form of audit to which all researchers in Higher Education are subject. Concerns have been raised by social researchers using visual methods that such ethical scrutiny and regulation will place severe limitations on visual research developments and practice. This paper draws on a qualitative study of social researchers using visual methods in the UK. The study explored their views, the challenges they face and the practices they adopt in relation to processes of ethical review. Researchers reflected on the variety of strategies they adopted for managing the ethical approval process in relation to visual research. For some this meant explicitly ‘making the case’ for undertaking visual research, notwithstanding the ethical challenges, while for others it involved ‘normalising’ visual methods in ways which delimited the possible ethical dilemmas of visual approaches. Researchers only rarely identified significant barriers to conducting visual research from ethical approval processes, though skilful negotiation and actively managing the system was often required. Nevertheless, the climate of increasing ethical regulation is identified as having a potential detrimental effect on visual research practice and development, in some instances leading to subtle but significant self-censorship in the dissemination of findings.

Keywords: Visual Research; Visual Methods; Ethics Committees; Ethical Regulation; Research Governance; Qualitative Methods

Wiles R, Coffey A, Robison J and Prosser J (2012) Ethical Regulation and Visual Methods: Making Visual Research Impossible or Developing Good Practice? Sociological Research Online. 17(1)8 http://www.socresonline.org.uk/17/1/8.html
Research Gate: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227599406_Ethical_Regulation_and_Visual…

Visual Methodologies: Special research ethics edition (Papers)0

Posted by Admin in on April 18, 2016
 

“This special issue on ethical issues in visual research arose from our collective observation that there is an urgent need for researchers to share and reflect upon stories about the ethical challenges they are facing in their research, including how they have navigated the formal procedural ethics review process and how they have identified and responded to ethical challenges in their research practice. Our approach in this special issue has been to call for tales from the field that raise new questions and highlight concerns within the context of real and ongoing research rather than attempt to derive solutions to ethical problems in an abstract or decontextualized way. The overall collection is therefore one that highlights the importance of good descriptive self-reflexive accounts of ethical and methodological issues, especially in terms of what is useful for other visual researchers and also for members of research ethics boards or committees (REB/REC).”

Click here to access this edition.

In this edition:

Editorial: Visual methods and ethics: Stories from the field
Susan M. Cox, Marilys Guillemin, Jenny Waycott, Deborah Warr
1-3

Re/formulating Ethical Issues for Visual Research Methods
Jenny Waycott, Marilys Guillemin, Deborah Joy Warr, Susan Cox, Sarah Drew, Catherine Howell
4-15

Ethical issues in the use of video observations with people with advanced dementia and their caregivers in nursing home environments
Gloria Puurveen, Alison Phinney, Susan Cox, Barbara Purvest
16-26

Adding the agentic capacities of visual materials to visual research ethics
Kim McLeod, Marilys Guillemin
27-42

Visual Embodiment of Psychosis: Ethical Concerns in Performing Difficult Experiences
Katherine Mary Boydell, Carmela Solimine, Siona Siona
43-52

Beneficence and contemporary art: when aesthetic judgment meets ethical judgment
Barbara Ruth Bolt
53-66

Making the visual invisible: exploring creative forms of dissemination that respect anonymity but retain impact
Dawn Mannay
67-76

Poor places, powerful people? Co-producing cultural counter-representations of place.
Ellie Byrne, Eva Elliott, Gareth Williams
77-85

Digital Ethnographic Techniques in Domestic Spaces: Notes on Methods and Ethics
Bjorn Nansen, Jenny Kennedy, Michael Arnold, Martin Gibbs, Rowan Wilken
86-97

Digital storytelling, image-making and self-representation: Building digital literacy as an ethical response for supporting Aboriginal young peoples’ digital identities
Fran Edmonds, Michelle Evans, Scott McQuire, Richard Chenhall

Undoing Ethics: Rethinking Practice in Online Research (Books: Whiteman N 2012)0

Posted by Admin in on January 10, 2016
 

“Over the past decade, researchers from different academic disciplines have paid increasing attention to the productivity of online environments. The ethical underpinnings of research in such settings, however, remain contested and often controversial. As traditional debates have been reignited by the need to respond to the particular characteristics of technologically-mediated environments, researchers have entered anew key debates regarding the moral, legal and regulative aspects of research ethics. A growing trend in this work has been towards the promotion of localized and contextualized research ethics – the suggestion that the decisions we make should be informed by the nature of the environments we study and the habits/expectations of participants within them. Despite such moves, the relationship between the empirical, theoretical and methodological aspects of Internet research ethics remains underexplored. Drawing from ongoing sociological research into the practices of media cultures online, this book provides a timely and distinctive response to this need.

This book explores the relationship between the production of ethical stances in two different contexts: the ethical manoeuvring of participants within online media-fan communities and the ethical decision-making of the author as Internet researcher, manoeuvring, as it were, in the academic community. In doing so, the book outlines a reflexive framework for exploring research ethics at different levels of analysis; the empirical settings of research; the theoretical perspectives which inform the researcher’s objectification of the research settings; and the methodological issues and practical decisions that constitute the activity as research. The analysis of these different levels develops a way of thinking about ethical practice in terms of stabilizing and destabilizing moves within and between research and researched communities. The analysis emphasizes the continuities and discontinuities between both research practice and online media-fan activity, and social activity in on and offline environments.”

Whiteman N (2012) Undoing Ethics: Rethinking Practice in Online Research. London: Springer
http://www.springer.com/fr/book/9781461418269

(Reference from the updated Booklet 37 of the Griffith University Research Ethics Manual. Perpetual licences are available for use by all researchers within an institution. Institutions have used the GUREM as the basis for producing their own research ethics manual, as a professional development resource and a teaching and learning materials for HDR candidates.)

0