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

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesResearch ethics committees

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Approving or Improving Research Ethics in Management Journals (Papers: Michelle Greenwood 2015)0

Posted by Admin in on February 12, 2016

Abstract: Despite significant scholarly debate about knowledge production in the management discipline through the peer-review journal processes, there is minimal discussion about the ethical treatment of the research subject in these publication processes. In contrast, the ethical scrutiny of management research processes within research institutions is often highly formalized and very focused on the protection of research participants. Hence, the question arises of how management publication processes should best account for the interests of the research subject, both in the narrow sense of specific research participants and in the broader understanding of the subject of the research. This question is particularly pertinent in light of significant codification of research ethics within academic institutions, and increasing self-reflection within the management discipline about the “good” of management research and education. Findings from a survey and interviews with management journal editors (and others involved in journal publication) reveal a complex scenario; many editors believe that a formalized requirement within the journal publication process may have detrimental outcomes and, in fact, diminish the ethical integrity of management scholarship. Building on these findings, this paper argues that ethical concern for the research subject merely in terms of institutional rule compliance and avoidance of harm to individual participants is insufficient, and calls for explicitly positive engagement with both the individual and the collective subject of management research should receive due ethical consideration. An alternative model involving reflexive ethical consideration of research subjects across the publication process—with implications for role of authors, reviewers, editors, and research subjects—is outlined.

Keywords: Research ethics Publication ethics Academic ethics Human subjects Ethics committees Research education Research training

Greenwood M (2015) Approving or Improving Research Ethics in Management Journals. Journal of Business Ethics. Available at:

Why should ethics approval be required prior to publication of health promotion research? (Papers: Ainsley J Newson and Wendy Lipworth 2015)0

Posted by Admin in on February 8, 2016


Issue addressed:Most academic journals that publish studies involving human participants require evidence that the research has been approved by a human research ethics committee (HREC). Yet journals continue to receive submissions from authorswho have failed to obtain such approval. In this paper, we provide an ethical justification of why journals should not, in general,publish articles describing research that has no ethics approval, with particular attention to the health promotion context.

Methods:Using theoretical bioethical reasoning and drawing on a case study, we first rebut some potential criticisms of the need for research ethics approval. We then outline four positive claims to justify a presumption that research should, in most instances,be published only if it has been undertaken with HREC approval.

Results:We present four justifications for requiring ethics approval before publication: (1) HREC approval adds legitimacy to the research; (2) the process of obtaining HREC approval can improve the quality of an intervention being investigated;(3) obtaining HREC approval can help mitigate harm; and (4) obtaining HREC approval demonstrates respect for persons.

Conclusion:This paper provides a systematic and comprehensive assessment of why research ethics approval should generally be obtained before publishing in the health promotion context.So what?Journals such as theHealth Promotion Journal of Australiahave recently begun to require research ethics approvalfor publishing research. Health promotion researchers will be interested in learning the ethical justification for this change.

Newson A and Lipworth W (2015) Why should ethics approval be required prior to publication of health promotion research?. Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 2015,26, 170–175. Available at: (accessed 9 February 2016)
Publisher (Open Access):

Academic Guidance in Medical Student Research: How Well Do Supervisors and Students Understand the Ethics of Human Research? (Papers: K M Weston, et al 2015)0

Posted by Admin in on February 8, 2016

Abstract: Research is increasingly recognised as a key component of medical curricula,offering a range of benefits including development of skills in evidence-based medicine.The literature indicates that experienced academic supervision or mentoring is important in any research activity and positively influences research output. The aim of this project was to investigate the human research ethics experiences and knowledge of three groups: medical students, and university academic staff and clinicians eligible to supervise medical student research projects; at two Australian universities. Training in research ethics was low amongst academic staff and clinicians eligible to supervise medical student research. Only two-thirds of academic staff (67.9 %) and students (65.7 %) and less than half of clinicians surveyed(47.1 %;p=0.014) indicated that specific patient consent was required for a doctor to include patient medical records within a research publication. There was limited awareness of requirements for participant information and consent forms amongst all groups. In the case of clinical trials, fewer clinicians (88.4 %) and students (83.3 %) than academics (100 %) indicated there was a requirement to obtain consent (p=0.009). Awareness of the ethics committee focus on respect was low across all groups. This project has identified significant gaps in human research ethics understanding among medical students, and university academic staff and clinicians. The incorporation of research within medical curricula provides the impetus for medical schools and their institutions to ensure that academic staff and clinicians who are eligible and qualified to supervise students’ research projects are appropriately trained in human research ethics

Keywords: Research ethics.Medical student.Medical school.Curriculum.Ethics committee

Weston K M, Mullan J, Hu W, Thomson C, Rich W, Knight-Billington P, Marjadi B, McLennan P (2015)Academic Guidance in Medical Student Research: How Well Do Supervisors and Students Understand the Ethics of Human Research?. Journal of Academic Ethics:1-16. Available at: (accessed 8 February 2016)

Applying “Place” to Research Ethics and Cultural Competence/Humility Training (Papers: Dianne P Quigley 2016)0

Posted by Admin in on February 4, 2016

Abstract: Research ethics principles and regulations typically have been applied to the protection of individual human subjects. Yet, new paradigms of research that include the place-based community and cultural groups as partners or participants of environmental research interventions, in particular, require attention to place-based identities and geographical contexts. This paper argues the importance of respecting “place” within human subjects protections applied to communities and cultural groups as part of a critical need for research ethics and cultural competence training for graduate research students. These protections and benefits are extensions of the Belmont Principles and have been included in recent recommendations from research regulatory committees.

Keywords: Human subjects Beneficence Justice Group protections Cultural competence Community-based research Bioethical principles

Quigley D (2016) Applying “Place” to Research Ethics and Cultural Competence/Humility Training. Journal of Academic Ethics March 2016, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 19-33 (First online 13 January 2016, Accessed 5 February)