ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)
Search
Generic filters
Filter by Keywords
Research ethics committees
Research integrity
From
To
Authors

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesJustice

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Ethical Procedures? A Critical Intervention: The sacred, the profane, and the planet (Papers: Keyan Tomaselli | 2017))0

Posted by Admin in on February 13, 2020
 

Abstract
Issues relating to ethical clearance, how these procedures relate to very different ontologies, ways of making sense, conditions of existence, and the ideological implications thereof are critically discussed. Written as an invited intervention, the author takes readers through a variety of paradigms: indigenous approaches involving the sacred and the profane, instrumentalization of research; multispeciesism and research as a lived practice. Comments are offered on the nature of science and some questions are posed on the contradictions of ethical practices that readers encounter. The method is eclectic, read through a Peirceian pragmatism, and the outcome proposes relationality rather than the inevitability of discrete findings. Some conclusions are offered on the geographical distribution of populations sampled.

Keywords
Ethical clearance; indigenous methods; multispeciesism; fieldwork, pragmatism

Tomaselli, Keyan. (2017). Ethical Procedures? A Critical Intervention: The sacred, the profane, and the planet. The Ethnographic Edge. 1. 3. 10.15663/tee.v1i1.21
ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321749816_Ethical_Procedures_A_Critical_Intervention_The_sacred…

Global Code of Conduct for Research in Resource-Poor Settings (TRUST Resource | May 2018)0

Posted by Admin in on February 11, 2020
 

Access by researchers to any biological or agricultural resources, human biological materials, traditional knowledge, cultural artefacts or non-renewable.

A useful TRUST resource to guide international research (of any discipline) that is conducted in poor settings. The resource includes 18 articles.

Global Code of Conduct for Research in Resource-Poor Settings. This Global Code of Conduct for Research in Resource-Poor Settings counters ethics dumping by: providing guidance across all research disciplines. presenting clear, short statements in simple language to achieve the highest possible accessibility.
.

ThisGlobalCodeofConductforResearchin Resource-Poor Settings counters ethics dumping by:
.

• Providing guidance across all research disciplines

Access the resource

The battle for ethical AI at the world’s biggest machine-learning conference – Nature (Elizabeth Gibney | January 2020)0

Posted by Admin in on February 9, 2020
 

Bias and the prospect of societal harm increasingly plague artificial-intelligence research — but it’s not clear who should be on the lookout for these problems.

Diversity and inclusion took centre stage at one of the world’s major artificial-intelligence (AI) conferences in 2018. But once a meeting with a controversial reputation, last month’s Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) conference in Vancouver, Canada, saw attention shift to another big issue in the field: ethics.

If your institution is involved in AI, algorithm or big data research, who advises on its ethical dimensions?   Given the potential for societal harm, perhaps it’s time for serious consideration of the need for research ethics review for such work.

The focus comes as AI research increasingly deals with ethical controversies surrounding the application of its technologies — such as in predictive policing or facial recognition. Issues include tackling biases in algorithms that reflect existing patterns of discrimination in data, and avoiding affecting already vulnerable populations. “There is no such thing as a neutral tech platform,” warned Celeste Kidd, a developmental psychologist at University of California, Berkeley, during her NeurIPS keynote talk about how algorithms can influence human beliefs. At the meeting, which hosted a record 13,000 attendees, researchers grappled with how to meaningfully address the ethical and societal implications of their work.
.

Ethics gap
Ethicists have long debated the impacts of AI and sought ways to use the technology for good, such as in health care. But researchers are now realizing that they need to embed ethics into the formulation of their research and understand the potential harms of algorithmic injustice, says Meredith Whittaker, an AI researcher at New York University and founder of the AI Now Institute, which seeks to understand the social implications of the technology. At the latest NeurIPS, researchers couldn’t “write, talk or think” about these systems without considering possible social harms, she says. “The question is, will the change in the conversation result in the structural change we need to actually ensure these systems don’t cause harm?”
.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

(China) ANU study says China deliberately falsifying data on organ transplants – The Canberra Times (Kirsten Lawson | November 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on January 31, 2020
 

New research blows the lid on China’s claim to have stopped using prisoners and groups such as Falun Gong for organ donation, finding that China appears to have systematically falsified its official data.

The Australian National University research, published on Friday, said analysis of the data implied “deliberate human intervention”, showing centrally coordinated data falsification “has clearly taken place”.

Simply, the rise in the numbers of transplants was “too neat to be true” and appeared to be generated using a simple quadratic equation, familiar to high school students.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

0