An argument for registers for research ethics committee members
Dr Gary Allen
September 29, 2022
No Comments
Read More
Research Ethics Monthly
ISSN 2206-2483
HREC decision-making about social research with children: the influence of payment, risk and method
April 21, 2022
No Comments
In her latest thought-provoking post Stephanie Taplin reflects on social research with children/young adults and the impact of offering them incentives in the form of payments.
These matters have been controversial for research ethics committee and resulted in a block of items in the review feedback from the reviewing committee/s.
Despite the authority provided by the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research (NHMRC, 2007, updated 2018) HRECs can be nervous about approving such research with incentives.
Despite this difficulty for reviewers, incentives in the form of payments definitely increases the chances that a young person will respond to a recruitment strategy.
Stephanie’s work has highlighted the degree to which a review body may be more comfortable with the offer of a chance to win and an incentive in a prize draw, at values over ten times as high as the direct incentive payment.
Another area of tension between the preferences of review body and young people is the difference between face-to-face interviews and anonymous questionnaires.
In this post Stephanie reflects on why researchers should engage with HRECs on these matters, rather than choose a path most likely to be accepted immediately by a committee.
What do HREC members think and do when deciding about children’s participation in social research? Results from the MESSI survey
November 30, 2021
No Comments
In this guest post, Associate Professor Stephanie Taplin (UTS) reflects upon the reflections and attitudes of members of a research ethics committee when reviewing a project involving sensitive issues, where the participants are young people.
She reflects upon the degree that this consideration is based upon standards and expectations that are often not transparent to researchers and can be an impediment to useful/important research.
This post is based upon a longer research output that was about research exploring those attitudes.
This included whether there were topics that a research ethics committee member would never approve for a research project to explore with young people.
This work points to the need for specialist professional development for committee members relating to research on sensitive issues with young people.
This also raises the question of what guidance material institutions publish for researchers and for reference by research ethics reviewers.
Tongue in Cheek
March 22, 2021
No Comments
Farida Fozdar responds and reflects upon the February 2021 post by Gary Allen and Mark Israel.
Farida Fozdar
The Tower of Babel (Allen and Israel, 2021) is a compelling image when considering issues to do with translation and interpreting and the ethics of social research. Even when we speak the same language, we may not be ‘speaking the same language’, so to speak (excuse the triple metaphor). Talking past each other occurs in many ways but, in communicating the clear purpose and potential risks of one’s research, clarity is vital. Here, I outline a few issues from personal research experience, arguing that the communities themselves may be best placed to identify ethics issues and solutions to translation and interpreting dilemmas.
When working with those from a language different from that of the researchers, it may be the case that the idea of research is not well understood in the culture of origin…
The Ethics and Politics of Qualitative Data Sharing
February 5, 2020
No Comments
Mark Israel (AHRECS and Murdoch University) and Farida Fozdar (The University of Western Australia). There is considerable momentum behind the
Should we Reframe Research Ethics as a Professional Ethics?
October 1, 2019
No Comments
Dr Nathan Emmerich Research Fellow in Bioethics at ANUMS Despite the fact that one of the urtexts of bioethics—Beauchamp and
Sage Methods Minute. January Spotlight: Research Ethics
February 26, 2019
No Comments
January’s Methods Minutes, a monthly newsletter produced by Sage Publishing, is a special issue focused on social research ethics. It reviews
Self-plagiarism? When re-purposing text may be ethically justifiable
January 19, 2019
No Comments
In an institutional environment where researchers may be coming under increasing pressure to publish, the temptations to take short cuts
AHRECS Human research ethics workshop in Thailand
December 22, 2018
No Comments
One of our consultants (Dr Lindsey Te Ata o Tu MacDonald) recently facilitated a seminar on research ethics in the
Categories
Featured posts
It’s not (just) about the money
August 26, 2018
No Comments
Let’s imagine for a moment that you are a mid-career university researcher with growing
How we interpret the words ‘proportional review’
June 2, 2020
No Comments
Dr Gary Allen AHRECS Senior Consultant Over the last decade, AHRECS has worked with
Empowering and enabling participation in human research: Reflections from two Queenslanders living with Multiple Sclerosis
October 1, 2019
1 Comment
Dr Gary Allen MS Qld Ambassador | AHRECS Senior Consultant | Member NS s4
The Ethics and Politics of Qualitative Data Sharing
February 5, 2020
No Comments
Mark Israel (AHRECS and Murdoch University) and Farida Fozdar (The University of Western Australia).