scholarly journals Graduate students’ experiences with research ethics in conducting health research

2016 ◽  
Vol 13 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 139-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy Petillion ◽  
Sherri Melrose ◽  
Sharon L Moore ◽  
Simon Nuttgens
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Research Ethics ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Qualitative Description ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Application Process ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Research Ethics Boards ◽  
Additional Support ◽  
Discipline Programs

Graduate students typically first experience research ethics when they submit their masters or doctoral research projects for ethics approval. Research ethics boards in Canada review and grant ethical approval for student research projects and often have to provide additional support to these novice researchers. Previous studies have explored curriculum content, teaching approaches, and the learning environment related to research ethics for graduate students. However, research does not exist that examines students’ actual experience with the research ethics process. Qualitative description was used to explore the research ethics review experience of 11 masters and doctoral students in health discipline programs. Data analysis revealed four themes: curriculum, supervisor support, the ethics application process, and students’ overall experience. The results of this research suggest ideas for enhancing curriculum, deepening students’ relationships with supervisors, and developing the role of research ethics boards to support education for novice researchers. This study contributes to comprehension of the research ethics experience for graduate students and what they value as new researchers.

scholarly journals COREC: the end of trainee-driven clinical research?

2007 ◽  
Vol 89 (9) ◽  
pp. 328-329
Author(s):  
N Patel ◽  
B George ◽  
A Chandratreya ◽  
S Bollen
Keyword(s):  
Research Ethics ◽  
Central Office ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Research Ethics Committees ◽  
Application Process ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
The Government ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Local Research

Since 1 March 2004 anyone who wishes to set up clinical trials in the United Kingdom has to go through an extensive application process to gain ethical approval. The Central Office for Research Ethics Committees (COREC) was set up by the government both to standardise and centralise the process and to address concerns regarding patient care, safety and confidentiality. We are encouraged to complete this online (http://www.corec.org.uk/). Here awaits a 60-page form, which although not all its pages are applicable, is time-consuming. There is also a research and development (RD) form (http://www.rdform.org.uk/) to complete, which deals with cost issues and a Caldicott form dealing with patient confidentiality. On top of all that there may be other local forms to complete. There is already evidence that applications to local research ethics committees are down by around 40% in the years 2003–2004.

scholarly journals What’s the protocol? Canadian university research ethics boards and variations in implementing Tri-Council policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-81
Author(s):  
Grace Karram Stephenson ◽  
Glen A. Jones ◽  
Emmanuelle Fick ◽  
Olivier Begin-Caouette ◽  
Aamir Taiyeb ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Education Research ◽  
Research Ethics ◽  
Significant Variation ◽  
National Level ◽  
University Research ◽  
Policy Statement ◽  
Higher Education Research ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Application Systems ◽  
Research Ethics Boards

This article is concerned with the differences in REB policy and application processes across Canada as they impact multi-jurisdictional, higher education research projects that collect data at universities themselves. Despite the guiding principles of the Tri-Council Policy Statement 2 (TCPS2) there is significant variation among the practices of Research Ethics Boards (REBs) at Canada’s universities, particularly when they respond to requests from researchers outside their own institution. The data for this paper were gathered through a review of research ethics applications at 69 universities across Canada. The findings suggest REBs use a range of different application systems and require different revisions and types of oversight for researchers who are not employed at their institution. This paper recommends further harmonization between REBs across the country and national-level dialogue on TCPS2 interpretations.

scholarly journals On becoming an organizational autoethnographer

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 232-242
Author(s):  
Fiona Armstrong-Gibbs
Keyword(s):  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Organizational Context ◽  
Ethical Conduct ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Application Process ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Ethical Implications ◽  
Institutional Ethics ◽  
Ethical Approval

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the process and challenges of applying an autoethnographic research method to a professional doctoral thesis ethics application. It examines the traditional university ethical approval process and if it is appropriate for this evolving qualitative research method within an organizational context. Design/methodology/approach A short introduction to the literature on ethics prefaces an autoethnographic account of the author’s experience as doctor of business administration candidate tackling the application process for ethical approval of primary research. The account is a reflection of the review process and critiques with reference to the existing literature. Findings The majority of the literature relating to ethics has focused on the private, personal and largely evocative accounts of autoethnography. This paper highlights some of the differences and potential for organizational autoethnography and ethical conduct. It highlights the ethical implications of obtaining consent from one’s colleagues, developing and maintaining dependent relationships, risk and reward to one’s own professional reputation and becoming equipped to create both personal and organizational change through a process of reflexivity. Originality/value This paper adds to the discussion about ethical conduct when undertaking new forms of organizational ethnographic research. For those interested or involved in the university institutional ethics review committees and for professional doctoral students who are developing an emancipatory insider research approach.

scholarly journals What’s the protocol? Canadian university research ethics boards and variations in implementing Tri-Council policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-81
Author(s):  
Grace Karram Stephenson ◽  
Glen A. Jones ◽  
Emmanuelle Fick ◽  
Olivier Bégin-Caouette ◽  
Aamir Taiyeb ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Education Research ◽  
Research Ethics ◽  
Significant Variation ◽  
National Level ◽  
University Research ◽  
Policy Statement ◽  
Higher Education Research ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Application Systems ◽  
Research Ethics Boards

This article is concerned with the differences in REB policy and application processes across Canada as they impact multi-jurisdictional, higher education research projects that collect data at universities themselves. Despite the guiding principles of the Tri-Council Policy Statement 2 (TCPS2) there is significant variation among the practices of Research Ethics Boards (REBs) at Canada’s universities, particularly when they respond to requests from researchers outside their own institution. The data for this paper were gathered through a review of research ethics applications at 69 universities across Canada. The findings suggest REBs use a range of different application systems and require different revisions and types of oversight for researchers who are not employed at their institution. This paper recommends further harmonization between REBs across the country and national-level dialogue on TCPS2 interpretations.

MRI Research Proposals Involving Child Subjects: Concerns Hindering Research Ethics Boards from Approving Them and a Checklist to Help Evaluate Them

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. DEBORAH SHILOFF ◽  
BRYAN MAGWOOD ◽  
KRISZTINA L. MALISZA
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Research Ethics ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
The United States ◽  
Institutional Review Boards ◽  
Scientific Review ◽  
Initial Development ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Research Ethics Boards ◽  
A Current

The process of research is often lengthy and can be extremely arduous. It may take many years to proceed from the initial development of an idea through to the comparison of the new modalities against a current gold-standard practice. Each step along the way involves rigorous scientific review, where protocols are scrutinized by multiple scientists not only in the specific field at hand but related fields as well. In addition to scientific review, most countries require a further review by a panel that will specifically address the ethics of the proposed research. In Canada, those panels are referred to as Research Ethics Boards (REB), with the United States counterparts known as Institutional Review Boards (IRB).

Reading routines: strategies of recall in graduate education

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary Alan Fine ◽  
Hannah Wohl ◽  
Simone Ispa-Landa
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Graduate Students ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Graduate Program ◽  
Graduate Training ◽  
Qualitative Interviews ◽  
Doctoral Program ◽  
Note Taking ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Social

Purpose This study aims to explore how graduate students in the social sciences develop reading and note-taking routines. Design/methodology/approach Using a professional socialization framework drawing on grounded theory, this study draws on a snowball sample of 36 graduate students in the social sciences at US universities. Qualitative interviews were conducted to learn about graduate students’ reading and note-taking techniques. Findings This study uncovered how doctoral students experienced the shift from undergraduate to graduate training. Graduate school requires students to adopt new modes of reading and note-taking. However, students lacked explicit mentorship in these skills. Once they realized that the goal was to enter an academic conversation to produce knowledge, they developed new reading and note-taking routines by soliciting and implementing suggestions from advanced doctoral students and faculty mentors. Research limitations/implications The specific requirements of the individual graduate program shape students’ goals for reading and note-taking. Further examination of the relationship between graduate students’ reading and note-taking and institutional requirements is warranted with a larger sample of universities, including non-American institutions. Practical implications Graduate students benefit from explicit mentoring in reading and note-taking skills from doctoral faculty and advanced graduate students. Originality/value This study uncovers the perspectives of graduate students in the social sciences as they transition from undergraduate coursework in a doctoral program of study. This empirical, interview-based research highlights the centrality of reading and note-taking in doctoral studies.

scholarly journals The role of libraries in teaching doctoral students to become information-literate researchers

2019 ◽  
Vol 120 (3/4) ◽  
pp. 158-172 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon Ince ◽  
Christopher Hoadley ◽  
Paul A. Kirschner
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Students ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Information Literacy ◽  
Digital Literacy ◽  
Literacy Practices ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Literacy Skills ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Skill Sets ◽  
Types Of Information

PurposeThis paper aims to review current literature pertaining to information literacy and digital literacy skills and practices within the research workflow for doctoral students and makes recommendations for how libraries (and others) can foster skill-sets for graduate student research workflows for the twenty-first century scholarly researcher.Design/methodology/approachA review of existing information literacy practices for doctoral students was conducted, and four key areas of knowledge were identified and discussed.FindingsThe findings validate the need for graduate students to have training in information literacy, information management, knowledge management and scholarly communication. It recommends empirical studies to be conducted to inform future practices for doctoral students.Practical implicationsThis paper offers four areas of training to be considered by librarians and faculty advisers to better prepare scholars for their future.Originality/valueThis paper presents a distinctive synthesis of the types of information literacy and digital literacy skills needed by graduate students.

Testing the relationships of motivation, time management and career aspirations on graduate students’ academic success

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ademola Amida ◽  
Sameera Algarni ◽  
Robert Stupnisky
Keyword(s):  
Academic Success ◽  
Graduate Students ◽  
Intrinsic Motivation ◽  
Doctoral Students ◽  
Time Management ◽  
Career Aspirations ◽  
Equation Modeling ◽  
Career Aspiration ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Perceived Success

PurposeThis study explored graduate students' academic success by testing a hypothesized model based on the self-determination theory (SDT), which posits that motivation, time management and career aspiration predicts perceived success.Design/methodology/approachA quantitative methodology was employed to garner data from a population of 324 graduate students, and then analyzed using structural equation modeling in R.FindingsIntrinsic motivation was the strongest motivation type that predicted graduate students' perceived success. Time management was another important predictor of perceived success, while career aspiration did not impact students' perception of success. Doctoral students showed significantly higher relatedness when compared to master degree students. In addition, male students showed significantly higher career aspirations than females, while female students showed significantly higher time management than their male counterparts. The results of this study support the SDT as a framework to understand graduate students' academic success.Originality/valueImplementing the research findings may increase graduate students' academic success. This study suggests direct ways of increasing graduate students' achievement through intrinsic motivation, time management and autonomy, as well as reducing amotivation (lack of motivation) to indirectly enhance academic success.

Ethics and the Ruling Relations of Research Production

2003 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carole Truman
Keyword(s):  
Research Ethics ◽  
Ethics Committees ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Governance ◽  
Community Mental Health Service ◽  
Moral Obligations ◽  
Research Participants ◽  
Research Production ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
Ethical Approval

The role of research ethics committees has expanded across the UK and North America and the process of ethical review has become re-institutionalised under proposals for research governance proposed by government. Ethics committees have gained a powerful role as gatekeepers within the research process. Underpinning the re-constitution of ethical guidelines and research governance, are a range of measures which protect institutional interests, without necessarily providing an effective means to address the moral obligations and responsibilities of researchers in relation to the production of social research. Discussion of research ethics from the standpoint of research participants who in this paper, are service users within health and social care, provides a useful dimension to current debate. In this paper I draw upon experiences of gaining ethical approval for a research study which focused on user participation within a community mental health service. I discuss the strategies used to gain ethical approval and the ‘formal concerns’ raised by the ethics committee. I then describe and discuss ethical issues which emerged from a participants’ perspective during the actual research as it was carried out. These experiences are analysed using aspects of institutional ethnography which provides a framework to explore how the experiences of research participants are mediated by texts which govern the processes of research production. The paper highlights incongruities between the formal ethical regulation of research, and the experiences of research participants in relation to ethical concerns within a research process.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document