Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Open and Closed Committees.Maureen H. Fitzgerald & Elisa Yule - 2004 - Monash Bioethics Review 23 (2):S35-S49.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Response to Susan Dodds: Is the Australian HREC system sustainable?Paul A. Komesaroff - 2002 - Monash Bioethics Review 21 (3):S68-S71.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Research ethics committees: what can we learn from the Western European and United States experience?Rowan Frew - 2001 - Monash Bioethics Review 20 (2):S61-S77.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Research ethics of business academic researchers at AACSB institutions.Douglas P. Dotterweich & Sharon Garrison - 1997 - Teaching Business Ethics 1 (4):431-447.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Is the Australian HREC system sustainable?Susan Dodds - 2002 - Monash Bioethics Review 21 (3):S43-S48.
    In Australia, Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) have a vital role to play—as the primary institutional mechanism for ethical review of research—in protecting research participants, and promoting ethical research. Their ability to act effectively in this role is currently threatened by the limited support they receive and their burgeoning workloads. In this discussion paper, I trace some of the factors contributing to what I describe as a resource crisis in human research ethics. I suggest a review of the working of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Is the Australian HREC system sustainable?Susan Dodds - 2002 - Monash Bioethics Review 21 (3):S43-S48.
    In Australia, Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) have a vital role to play—as the primary institutional mechanism for ethical review of research—in protecting research participants, and promoting ethical research. Their ability to act effectively in this role is currently threatened by the limited support they receive and their burgeoning workloads. In this discussion paper, I trace some of the factors contributing to what I describe as a resource crisis in human research ethics. I suggest a review of the working of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Improving Australia’s ethical review processes — slow and steady wins the race.Kerry J. Breen - 2002 - Monash Bioethics Review 21 (3):S58-S62.
    In this response, the Australian Health Ethics Committee (AHEC) indicates that it shares, and has strategies in place to address, the majority of the concerns identified by Susan Dodds. AHEC believes it is too early to assess the full impact of the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Research Involving Humans (1999) or to call for a major review of the ethics committee process. While some Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) are over-stretched, the system is not on the verge of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The new national statement on ethical conduct in research involving humans: A social theoretic perspective.R. E. Ashcroft - 1999 - Monash Bioethics Review 18 (4):14-17.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Why ethical codes constitute an unconscionable regression.Michael Schwartz - 2000 - Journal of Business Ethics 23 (2):173 - 184.
    The article protests against the usage of ethical codes by business organisations. It asserts that professionals are in a different situation to that of employees; and that with the latter ethical codes are used by management to ensure compliance and are devoid of ethical content. Ethical codes it is argued are part of management's control system in a time of flatter organisational structures with a far wider span of control. It is also asserted that the ambitions of some to utilise (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   33 citations  
  • Challenges for research ethics and moral knowledge construction in the applied social sciences.Stephen L. Payne - 2000 - Journal of Business Ethics 26 (4):307 - 318.
    Certain critical accounts of conventional research practices in business and the social sciences are explored in this essay. These accounts derive from alternative social paradigms and their underlying assumptions about appropriate social inquiry and knowledge construction. Among these alternative social paradigms, metatheories, mindscapes, or worldviews are social constructionist, critical, feminist, and postmodern or poststructural thinking. Individuals with these assumptions and values for knowledge construction are increasingly challenging conventional scholarship in what has been referred to as paradigm debates or wars. Issues (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations