Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The ethics review and the humanities and social sciences: disciplinary distinctions in ethics review processes.Jessica Carniel, Andrew Hickey, Kim Southey, Annette Brömdal, Lynda Crowley-Cyr, Douglas Eacersall, Will Farmer, Richard Gehrmann, Tanya Machin & Yosheen Pillay - 2023 - Research Ethics 19 (2):139-156.
    Ethics review processes are frequently perceived as extending from codes and protocols rooted in biomedical disciplines. As a result, many researchers in the humanities and social sciences (HASS) find these processes to be misaligned, if not outrightly obstructive to their research. This leads some scholars to advocate against HASS participation in institutional review processes as they currently stand, or in their entirety. While ethics review processes can present a challenge to HASS researchers, these are not insurmountable and, in fact, present (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • ‘It’s All Public Anyway’: A Collaborative Navigation of Anonymity and Informed Consent in a Study with Identifiable Parent Carers.Pam Joseph - 2023 - Ethics and Social Welfare 17 (2):191-205.
    For qualitative researchers seeking the perspectives of people with unusual characteristics or circumstances, compliance with expectations about participant anonymity can be difficult, if not impossible. In the age of internet communications and emerging research methodologies, traditional strategies require ongoing re-examination to ensure cohesion between a project’s ethical framework and its research practice. This paper reflects on the approach to informed consent used in a study with parent carers whose children had high-level support needs. A two-step process of written consent was (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark