ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)
Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search into
Filter by Categories
Research ethics committees
Research integrity

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesInternational

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

“A Real Super Ethical Super Moral Perspective:” The Research Ethics of Research Participants (Papers: Justin Snyder and Joanna Lysons 2015)0

Posted by Admin in on February 2, 2016
 

“What are the research protections ethics of contemporary research participants? There are few answers to this question. However, to fully honor the principle of “respect for persons,” human protections programs should engage community opinion. Some have called this an “evidence-based and participant-centered” approach to protections (e.g. McDonald, Cox, and Townsend 2014). With this in mind, five focus groups were conducted with former research participants. The focus groups addressed perceptions of research participation generally, but the findings for this poster come specifically from questions referring to research protections policies and programs. Participants knew or assumed, as well as desired, there to be ethical oversight of investigators, but they showed only a vague understanding of the protections actually afforded them. We found, nonetheless, that research participants and human protections programs share similar ethical principles. Both generally agree on what it means to have, adopting the words of one research participant, “a real super ethical super moral perspective.” The poster identifies 4 ethical principles or expectations for human protection programs commonly vocalized in the focus groups. Future research should explore how participants do or would apply their research ethics, which will likely reveal discrepancies among participants and between participants and protections programs”

Snyder J and Lysons J (2015) “A Real Super Ethical Super Moral Perspective:” The Research Ethics of Research Participants. Poster at PRIM&R’s Advancing Ethical Research Conference, Boston MA, 12-15 November 2015. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282610253_A_Real_Super_Ethical_Super_Moral_Perspective_The_Research_Ethics_of_Research_Participants (accessed 3 February 2016)

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process Psychology retractions have quadrupled since 1989: study (Papers: Marc Hauser et al 2015)0

Posted by Admin in on January 30, 2016
 

“Psychology has been home to some of the most infamous cases of fraud in recent years, and while it’s just a few bad apples who are spoiling the bunch, the field itself has seen an overall increase in retractions, according to a new paper by Jürgen Margraf appearing in Psychologische Rundschau and titled “Zur Lage der Psychologie.”

That increase, Margraf found, is not entirely due to its most well-known fraudsters.”

Hauser M, Smeesters D, Stapel D (2015) Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process Psychology retractions have quadrupled since 1989: study. Retraction Watch, 5 March. Available at: http://retractionwatch.com/2015/03/05/psychology-retractions-have-quadrupled-since-1989-study/ (accessed 31 January 2016).

Looking for Resources to Teach Research Ethics? (Resource: 2016)0

Posted by Admin in on January 24, 2016
 

(In Australia these five cases would be described as relating to research integrity rather than research ethics).

“The UNH Responsible Conduct of Research and Scholarly Activity Committee has posted on its website five new case studies for teaching research ethics. The difference with these case studies is that they describe actual people and real events that occurred; they are not contrived. As such, they can be very effective tools for teaching responsible and ethical behavior, and community standards for the conduct of research and scholarly activity.

The five cases are:

Doris Kearns Goodwin
Marc Hauser
Michael LaCour
Eric Poehlman
Jan Hendrik Schön

Each case involves some form of research misconduct ~ fabrication of data, falsification of data, or plagiarism ~ as well as other behaviors or actions that are generally considered in the scientific community as questionable, undesirable, or unethical.”

This public resource can be accessed from: http://www.unh.edu/research/blog/2016/01/looking-resources-teach-research-ethics

Social media personhood as a challenge to research ethics: Exploring the case of the Facebook experiment (Papers: Jukka Jouhki et al 2015)0

Posted by Admin in on January 22, 2016
 

Abstract: The paper explores research ethics in the era of social media and big data by discussing a debated Facebook experiment about emotional contagion.

“Our attitudes towards new digital media have changed over time. We used to “starve” for data but now we are “drowning” in it (Puschmann and Burgess 2014, p. 1699). Also, when in the early days of the internet the new technology was hyped as an “identity transforming cyberspace”, nowadays, after exponential growth of the digital network and acertain routinization of its charisma (Morrison 2006, p. 367–368), it has been popularized, domesticated, and normalized into a technology for “everyday life management”. It is not the “consensual hallucination machine” it once was (McKelvey et al. 2015). The technologies we use influence our identity and personhood. Or, to use Heidegger’s term, technology
is part of our being-in-the-world (Dreyfus 1991). Our concerns over technology and data depend on the sociocultural context, and, ultimately, on the individual – we are either more worried or less worried nowadays, depending on the study (Kennedy et al. 2015, p. 4).”

Jukka Jouhki, Epp Lauk, Maija Penttinen, Jukka Rohila, Niina Sormanen, Turo Uskali (2015) Social media personhood as a challenge to research ethics: Exploring the case of the Facebook experiment. Conference Paper · Nov 2015 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284156533_Social_media_personhood_as_a_challenge_to…

Also see
1. (25/03/14) Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks
2. (01/04/14) Facebook fiasco: was Cornell’s study of ‘emotional contagion’ an ethics breach? 
3. (10/05/15) Social media personhood as a challenge to research ethics: Exploring the case of the Facebook experiment
4. (10/05/15) Untangling research and practice: What Facebook’s “emotional contagion” study teaches us
5. (20/05/16) Scientists are just as confused about the ethics of big-data research as you
6. (17/06/16) Are Research Ethics Obsolete In The Era Of Big Data?

0