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

ResourcesResearcher responsibilities

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Guidelines for Ethical Research in Australian Indigenous Studies (GERAIS)0

Posted by Admin in on May 27, 2015

Published by the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. This resource was first published in 2002 and was updated in 2010 and 2012. The guidelines outline 15 principles which should inform the conception, design, conduct and reporting the results of research Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Arguably the principles discussed in the GERAIS document are a far more useful reference for research outside of the health sciences compared to the NHMRC’s Values and Ethics guidelines.

“Indigenous peoples have inherent rights, including the right to self-determination. The principles in these Guidelines for Ethical Research in Australian Indigenous Studies are founded on respect for these rights, including rights to full and fair participation in any processes, projects and activities that impact on them, and the right to control and maintain their culture and heritage. AIATSIS considers that these principles are not only a matter of ethical research practice but of human rights.

“It is essential that Indigenous people are full participants in research projects that concern them, share an understanding of the aims and methods of the research, and share the results of this work. At every stage, research with and about Indigenous peoples must be founded on a process of meaningful engagement and reciprocity between the researcher and Indigenous people. It should also be recognised that there is no sharp distinction between researchers and Indigenous people. Indigenous people are also researchers, and all participants must be regarded as equal partners in a research engagement.”

Griffith University Research Ethics Manual (GUREM)0

Posted by Admin in on May 27, 2015

A booklet-based resource manual for researchers and ethics reviewers. Rather than a rulebook the GUREM is a resource for reflective practice in human research. The 46 booklets cover a wide range of topics, such as recruitment, consent, social media in research and the exposure of illegal behaviour. Click here to see a list of the current booklets.

The intended audience for the resource is researchers, ethics reviewers, policy/educational officers and commentators.

Dr Gary Allen is the primary author of the GUREM.

Further information about the GUREM:

1) Web page for the GUREM;
2) A list of the 46 booklets are available upon request;
3) Excerpt of booklets can be provided on request for evaluative purposes; and
4) The consolidated index of the GUREM can be accessed here.

Licenses are available to research institutions to use the GUREM as the foundation of their resource material. The enduring license need only be purchased once for all researchers at that institution.

For five years licensees will receive track change updates of any updates to the GUREM (e.g. arising from the rolling review of the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research and the new national application form). Click here to see information about previous updates to Booklets of the Manual.

Unraveling ethics : illuminating the moral dilemmas of research ethics (Journal: Christine Halse & Anne Honey 2005,)0

Posted by Admin in on May 27, 2015

JOURNAL: Halse, C., & Honey, A. (2005), Unraveling ethics : illuminating the moral dilemmas of research ethics, Signs : journal of women in culture and society, Vol. 30, no. 4 (Summer 2005), pp. 2141-2162

“This essay offers a critical, reflective analysis of some of the sticky moral questions that can entangle feminist researchers as they work to transform a research proposal into an application for ethics committee approval. We write not as philosophers or ethicists but as feminist social scientists reflecting on our struggle to do ethical research and to be ethical researchers in an environment governed by a regulatory model of research ethics. Our story is constructed as two intersecting narratives. In the first section of our essay, “A Narrative about Ethics,” we relate our account of how ethical theory plays out in the real world, drawing on our experience of preparing the ethics applications for an interview study with “anorexic” teenage girls and our struggles with two pillars of research ethics policy: defining the research population and eliciting informed consent.1 In the second section of our essay, “Ethics in Our Narrative,” we tease out the implications of the research ethics approval process for the people who participate in research and for those who desire to be ethical and moral researchers.”


How A Gay-Marriage Study Went Wrong (Maria Konnikova, New Yorker magazine)0

Posted by Admin in on May 27, 2015

An interesting magazine article discussing a serious research integrity matter for a social sciences project with sobering implications for collaborative research and the impacts of falsification/fabrication of data.