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

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesTraining

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Constructive Voices: Panel discussion about institutional implementation of the Australian Code (2018)0

Posted by Admin in on November 13, 2018
 

On 8th November, AHRECS hosted its first Constructive Voices panel. These panels aim to create an opportunity for open discussion about human research ethics and research integrity among researchers, policymakers, research managers, research ethics reviewers and other stakeholders.

The first panel featured:

  • Jillian Barr, Director of Ethics and Governance at NHMRC
  • Kandy White, Director, Research Ethics and Integrity, Macquarie Uni
  • Gary Allen, Senior Consultant, AHRECS

We had close to 40 participants at peak and would like to believe that the session nudged the debate and activity forward across a range of institutions. The PowerPoints, recording and links to relevant documents will be freely available on the AHRECS website for 90 days at https://ahrecs.com/post-panel-room

Below is a recording of the panel discussion. It will here for 90 and afterwards, the materials will be archived on the Patreon site for AHRECS subscribers.

OTHER MATERIAL MENTIONED

Register for the National Statement Constructive Voices discussion panel event on 22 November
The free Research Ethics Monthly blogSubscribe
The subscribers’ area – a subscription of USD15/month provides access to the growing library of professional development and other resources. It is also a great way to support events and services like this.

If you have any questions or comments about any of the above send an email to ConstructiveVoices@ahrecs.com.

 

It’s not too late to register for today’s free webinar about institutions and the implementation of the Australian Code (2018)0

Posted by Admin in on November 7, 2018
 

This afternoon AHRECS is hosting a hosting a free Constructive Voices panel discussion about implementing the Australian Code 2018.

The 30 minute online panel will bring together the perspectives of the NHMRC, the drafting committee and research offices. While question be sent in during the session we encourage sending your questions to us now – ACburningquestion@ahrecs.com

New South WalesThursday, 8 November at 2:30:00 pm AEDT UTC+11 hours
Western AustraliaThursday, 8 November at 11:30:00 am AWST UTC+8 hours
Australian Capital TerritoryThursday, 8 November at 2:30:00 pm AEDT UTC+11 hours
QueenslandThursday, 8 November at 1:30:00 pm AEST UTC+10 hours
South AustraliaThursday, 8 November at 2:00:00 pm ACDT UTC+10:30 hours
Northern TerritoryThursday, 8 November at 1:00:00 pm ACST UTC+9:30 hours
Victoria/TasmaniaThursday, 8 November at 2:30:00 pm AEDT UTC+11 hours
New ZealandThursday, 8 November at 4:30:00 pm NZDT UTC+13 hours

.
To register for this event complete the short form at  https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_nsbPkzfbT6S4YWzeEekKxA

We hope to see you there!

From punish to empower: A blame-free approach to research misconduct – Nature Index (Lex Bouter | October 2018)0

Posted by Admin in on October 31, 2018
 

Research institutions have a duty to foster integrity, and that includes monitoring.

The Netherlands has a new code of conduct, which outlines institutions’ duty of care to foster research integrity — a rare emphasis in such documents.

In many regions, including the United States and Scandinavia, codes of conduct have a legal basis. Serious breaches in research integrity are investigated by governmental committees, with an emphasis on sanctioning misconduct.

In contrast, the Netherlands’ position is that research institutions should empower scientists to maintain the principles and standards of responsible research practice. Researchers and their institutions are expected to learn from their mistakes, and improve the quality of science. Rather than policing scientists, the Dutch focus is on blame-free reporting and inviting researchers to discuss the dilemmas they experience.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

There is little evidence to suggest peer reviewer training programmes improve the quality of reviews – LSE Blog (Shaun Khoo | May 2018)0

Posted by Admin in on September 28, 2018
 

In little more than a year a number of peer reviewer training programmes have launched, promising to help early-career researchers learn how to do peer review, review more efficiently, and connect with editors at top journals. This follows an expressed need from graduate students and postdocs for precisely this sort of training. But can these new programmes deliver? And as many providers suggest moves towards a subscription-based model, are they worth individuals or institutions paying for them? Shaun Khoo examines the evidence base and finds that there is little to suggest that peer reviewer training programmes actually improve the quality of article reviews.

Peer reviewer training for graduate students and postdocs is pretty trendy right now. As the number of submissions to academic journals grows, publishers are interested in expanding their reviewer pools. Over the last year we have seen the launch of the Publons Academy, ACS Reviewer Lab, Nature Masterclasses’ Focus on Peer Review, and JNeurosci’s Reviewer Mentoring Program. These training programmes promise to help researchers learn how to do peer review, review more efficiently, and connect with editors at top journals. They also fill a gap in researcher training, as over 90% of early-career researchers express interest in peer review training but few receive any formal training during their PhDs. But can these new training programmes deliver? And if training providers were to make their programmes subscription-based, would it be worth the investment?

What are the training programmes like?

Each training course has its own distinct and useful features. In general, programmes like the ACS Reviewer Lab, Publons Academy, and Nature Masterclass feature text and short video segments on how to do peer review, what to focus on, what not to focus on, and ethical dilemmas. They sometimes also feature online formative assessments, like answering multiple choice questions at the end of the unit.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

0