ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesSocial Science

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Brazilian ethics clash exposes science culture gap – SciDevNet (Carla Almeida May 2016)0

Posted by Admin in on June 6, 2016
 

Speed read

Rules on human research mainly created for biomedical research

Social scientists pushed for changes so rules meet their needs

Political upheaval in Brazil looks set to delay new rules being signed off

Bureaucracy is an old enemy of Latin American science. The difficulty of importing research material — cell culture for example — and the maze of red tape that researchers must address are real obstacles. They can make research unviable and have slowed the progress of science in the region.

The past few years have seen various attempts to reduce bureaucracy. As part of this, Brazilian human and social scientists have pushed for changes in the ethical and legal framework of all types of research involving human beings, an issue that has caused discontent among these researchers.

The issue is not that they oppose the ethical principles, such as respect for human dignity and the protection of research subjects, which guide these regulations. Rather the point is that the rules, created primarily to regulate biomedical research, do not meet the specific needs of social science.

The main concern is that the system imposes the same rules for two different kinds of research: research into human beings, for example to develop and test new drugs, and research with human beings, which uses ethnography, observation and interviews to understand social behaviour.

The situation is aggravated by the entire system falling under the remit of the National Health Council, part of the ministry of health. Both the council and ministry are made up mainly of representatives from the medical sciences. As well as judging the ethical implications of research projects, the council has been judging their scientific merit too, and this includes projects outside the medical field and so outside their expertise.

Read the full news story

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Human Research Ethics Resource Manual (SoTL Manual)0

Posted by Admin in on June 5, 2016
 

In 2014 the Commonwealth Office of Learning and Teaching (OLT) commissioned AHRECS to undertake work to help OLT grant-holders and fellows avoid unnecessary difficulties and delays during research ethics review.

We identified several contributing factors to these problems including:

  1. the inexperience of some Scholarship of Teaching and Learning researchers in approaching human research and human research ethics review;
  2. the unfamiliarity of some research ethics reviewers with standard practices in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning; and
  3. the absence of resources relating to the ethical design and review of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning research.

The OLT contracted AHRECS to produce a resource manual to support the ethical decision making of the researchers that it funded. It also wanted to assist other SoTL researchers and research ethics reviewers with the ethical review of SoTL research.

The AHRECS SoTL Manual is comprised of six complementary booklets that include academic references, recommended reading and prompts for ethical reflections. The booklets are practically focused and include example problems/suggested strategies.

The Manual is available from the OLT web site, and a copy is hosted on the AHRECS site below.

Booklet 01 SoTL Manual: Research ethics and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

Booklet 02 SoTL Manual: Ethics review and grant or fellowship funded research

Booklet 03 SoTL Manual: Risks and benefits in SoTL research

Booklet 04 SoTL Manual: Recruitment and consent in SoTL research

Booklet 05 SoTL Manual: Privacy and confidentiality in SoTL funded research

Booklet 06 SoTL Manual: Ethical challenges and practical strategies

The SoTL Manual applies, references and complements the University Research Ethics Manual commercialised by Griffith University. It is however possible to use the SoTL Manual without purchasing a UREM license.

The six booklets of the SoTL Manual are provided here as *.docx on an open license basis for use by researchers, research ethics reviewers, research office staff, and institutions.  If you want to use more than one paragraph of text from the SoTL Manual (e.g. as the basis of a new resource), we ask you to cite the SoTL Manual as a source including the fact that the SoTL Manual was commissioned by the OLT and produced by AHRECS.

Allen, G, Israel, M and Thomson, C (2016) Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Human Research Ethics Resource Manual. Sydney: Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching.
https://ahrecs.com/?post_type=resource&p=1696

Please direct any questions about the SoTL Manual or the UREM to Dr Gary Allen (gary@ahrecs.com). You can find out more about the work of AHRECS at www.ahrecs.com.

Please note that we have found that sometimes links from Word documents to our web site can return an error. This is an intermittent bug, all six booklets are on the AHRECS site, and the links are correct.

Hysterical inquiry and autoethnography: A lacanian alternative to institutionalized ethical commandments (Papers: Andrew Dickson and Kate Holland 2016)0

Posted by Admin in on June 4, 2016
 

Abstract: This article questions the ethical commandments issued by research ethics committees, particularly in relation to autoethnography, and points towards an alternative based on an examination and application of the psychoanalytic ethics of hysterical inquiry. The authors demonstrate the ethics of hysterical inquiry in operation in qualitative research via a discussion of an autoethnography by Elizabeth Dauphinee and contrast this with a paper ‘on’ autoethnography by Martin Tolich. They argue that these two very different offerings can be positioned respectively as from Lacan’s hysteric’s discourse and the university’s discourse. Finally the authors conclude that hysterical inquiry with its focus on desire can provide a way forward for radical qualitative research, a way out of the binds of institutionalized ethical commandments that threaten the radical potential of qualitative research.

Keywords: Autoethnography ethics ethics committees hysteric hysterical inquiry Lacan psychoanalysis qualitative research

Dickson A, and Holland K (2016) Hysterical inquiry and autoethnography: A lacanian  alternative to institutionalized ethical commandments. Current Sociology. doi: 10.1177/0011392115623603
Publisher: http://csi.sagepub.com/content/early/2016/02/02/0011392115623603.abstract

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Human Research Ethics Resource Manual (SoTL Manual)0

Posted by Admin in on June 3, 2016
 

 

AHRECS2

In 2014 the Commonwealth Office of Learning and Teaching (OLT) commissioned AHRECS to undertake work to help OLT grant-holders and fellows avoid unnecessary difficulties and delays during research ethics review.

We identified several contributing factors to these problems including:

  1. the inexperience of some Scholarship of Teaching and Learning researchers in approaching human research and human research ethics review;
  2. the unfamiliarity of some research ethics reviewers with standard practices in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning; and
  3. the absence of resources relating to the ethical design and review of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning research.

The OLT contracted AHRECS to produce a resource manual to support the ethical decision making of the researchers that it funded. It also wanted to assist other SoTL researchers and research ethics reviewers with the ethical review of SoTL research.

The AHRECS SoTL Manual is comprised of six complementary booklets that include academic references, recommended reading and prompts for ethical reflections. The booklets are practically focused and include example problems/suggested strategies.

The Manual is available from the OLT web site, and a copy is hosted on the AHRECS site below.

Booklet 01 SoTL Manual: Research ethics and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

Booklet 02 SoTL Manual: Ethics review and grant or fellowship funded research

Booklet 03 SoTL Manual: Risks and benefits in SoTL research

Booklet 04 SoTL Manual: Recruitment and consent in SoTL research

Booklet 05 SoTL Manual: Privacy and confidentiality in SoTL funded research

Booklet 06 SoTL Manual: Ethical challenges and practical strategies

The SoTL Manual applies, references and complements the University Research Ethics Manual commercialised by Griffith University. It is however possible to use the SoTL Manual without purchasing a UREM license.

The six booklets of the SoTL Manual are provided here as *.docx on an open license basis for use by researchers, research ethics reviewers, research office staff, and institutions.  If you want to use more than one paragraph of text from the SoTL Manual (e.g. as the basis of a new resource), we ask you to cite the SoTL Manual as a source including the fact that the SoTL Manual was commissioned by the OLT and produced by AHRECS.

Allen, G, Israel, M and Thomson, C (2016) Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Human Research Ethics Resource Manual. Sydney: Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching.
https://ahrecs.com/?post_type=resource&p=1696

Please direct any questions about the SoTL Manual or the UREM to Dr Gary Allen (gary@ahrecs.com). You can find out more about the work of AHRECS at www.ahrecs.com.

Please note that we have found that sometimes links from Word documents to our web site can return an error. This is an intermittent bug, all six booklets are on the AHRECS site, and the links are correct.

0