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

ResourcesNew Zealand

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

What does organizational diversity in New Zealand tertiary sector research ethics committees teach us about balancing consultative and governance approaches to ethics review? (Papers: Helen Gremillion, et al 2016)0

Posted by Admin in on October 13, 2016
 

Abstract:
This article compares and contrasts the operational practices of ten tertiary research ethics committees in New Zealand, with an in-depth focus on five of these committees, contributing to an identified goal in the literature of rendering more visible the workings of such committees in order to promote applicant engagement. The authors expand upon a study by Tolich et al. (2015), which collected brief narratives from members of five committees and found that the ways committees are run vary quite significantly. In this article five additional narratives are considered, and all ten are compared, with particular consideration given to review processes for applications, and applicants’ levels of access to committee members and committee deliberations. We focus on the different ways that variously constrained institutions navigate the tension between ethical decision-making as regulatory activity, and researcher participation and engagement in this decision-making process. The reality and value of institutionally-specific operational practices is confirmed, and simultaneously, potential ‘best practice’ options that could be applied more broadly are explored. The article proposes questions for future research that emerge from suggestive patterns and points of contrast in the narratives.

Gremillion H, Snell D, Crosthwaite J, Finch B, Paterson J and Tavinor G (2016) What does organizational diversity in New Zealand tertiary sector research ethics committees teach us about balancing consultative and governance approaches to ethics review? New Zealand Sociology 31(4), pp4-27.
Publisher: https://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=339248951923644;res=IELHSS

A narrative account of ethics committees and their codes (Papers: Martin Tolich September 2016)0

Posted by Admin in on October 7, 2016
 

Abstract:
This article is based on an invited speech given at Massey University in August 2016 where Tolich revealed the inspiration for his 25-year sociological analysis of research ethics committees and their codes. The title of the talk “sociologically, do we need ethics committees?” began exploring the stigma ethics committee applicants experience when their qualitative research design does not meet the ethics committee’s biomedical expectations at issue. In 1992 this disjuncture provoked Tolich’s sociological imagination to engage a literature where he found his private troubles were for other sociologists’ public issues, as if these other qualitative researchers collectively experienced a similar stigma. The article reports on Tolich’s attempts to resolve power imbalances between researchers and ethics committees by creating an experimental ethics committees and resources that support the ethics of social science researchers. The second half of the article critiques the codes ethics committees’ use finding they contain little understanding of qualitative research with the potential to harm research participants. The article ends contrasting the impoverishment of New Zealand’s ethics codes with those in Australia, and especially in Canada asking why doesn’t New Zealand have an equivalent National Statement?

Tolich M (2016) A narrative account of ethics committees and their codes. New Zealand Sociology, 31(4) pp43-55.
Publisher: https://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=339416648664968;res=IELNZC

One size does not fit all: organisational diversity in New Zealand tertiary sector ethics committees (Papers: Martin Tolich et al 2015)0

Posted by Admin in on August 30, 2016
 

Abstract
New Zealand tertiary ethics committees may work from similar ethical principles but this article demonstrates that the way in which they operate is idiosyncratic. The paper builds on commentaries offered by current or former members of five New Zealand ethics committees on the organisation and practices of their committees. It examines differences among the committees with the aim of initiating an ongoing conversation about the work of ethics committees in the New Zealand context. It argues for the merits of diversity, transparency and openness as core principles for the work of ethics committees and as a platform for dealing with critique.

Keywords: centralisation, diversity, ethics committees, New Zealand, universities,

Tolich M, Bathurst R, Deckert A, Flanagan P, Gremillion H and Grimshaw M (2015) One size does not fit all: organisational diversity in New Zealand tertiary sector ethics committees. Kōtuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online, 11(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1177083X.2015.1035732
Publisher: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1177083X.2015.1035732

Resourcing reflective practice – whiteboard video0

Posted by Admin in on July 27, 2016
 

The AHRECS team is thrilled to share this seven-and-a-half minute video about the value and importance of resourcing the reflective practice of research, rather than focussing on enforcing compliance with rules.

Be a voice for constructive change! Please promote this video throughout your networks.

Please contact us by emailing gary.allen@ahrecs.com if you want help in moving your institution move to a resourcing reflective practice approach.

The script for this whiteboard was written by Dr Gary Allen and it is spoken by Adj Prof Mark Israel. It was produced for us by the very talented BethanyDivaa through Fiverr.com.

0