Suchergebnisse

The conduct of research with human participants is facing increased scrutiny from government, media, and academic sources. Research oversight is consequently increasing dramatically as education and accreditation movements gain momentum. Institutional review boards themselves are undergoing significant changes in organization and accountability, implementing new tools to monitor investigator compliance.

Ethical issues have been of ongoing interest in discussions of community-based participatory action research (CBPAR). In this article we suggest that the notion of reciprocity — defined as an ongoing process of exchange with the aim of establishing and maintaining equality between parties — can provide a guide to the ethical practice of CBPAR. Through sharing our experiences with a CBPAR project focused on mental health services and supports in several cultural-linguistic immigrant communities in Ontario, Canada, we provide insights into our attempts at establishing reciprocal relationships with community members collaborating in the research study and discuss how these relationships contributed to ethical practice. We examine the successes and challenges with specific attention to issues of power and gain for the researched community. We begin with a discussion of the concept of reciprocity, followed by a description of how it was put into practice in our project, and, finally, conclude with suggestions for how an ethic of reciprocity might contribute to other CBPAR projects.

Background: Since the Helsinki Declaration was introduced in 1964 as a code of practice for clinical research, it has generally been agreed that research governance is also needed in the field of public health and health promotion research. Recently, a range of factors led to the development of more stringent bureaucratic procedures, governing the conduct of low-risk population-based health research in the United Kingdom. Methods: Our paper highlights a case study of the application process to medical research ethics committees in the United Kingdom for a study of the promotion of physical activity by health care providers. The case study presented here is an illustration of the challenges in conducting low-risk population-based health research. Results: Our mixed-methods approach involved a questionnaire survey of and semi-structured interviews with health professionals (who were all healthy volunteers). Since our study does not involve the participation of either patients or the general population, one would expect the application to the relevant research ethics committees to be a formality. This proved not to be the case! Conclusion: Research ethics committees could be counter-productive, rather than protecting the vulnerable in the research process, they can stifle low-risk population-based health research. Research ethics in health services research is first and foremost the responsibility of the researcher(s), and we need to learn to trust health service researchers again. The burden of current research governance regulation to address the perceived ethical problems is neither appropriate nor adequate. Senior researchers/academics need to educate and train students and junior researchers in the area of research ethics, whilst at the same time reducing pressures on them that lead to unethical research, such as commercial funding, inappropriate government interference and the pressure to publish. We propose that non-invasive low-risk population-based health studies such as face-to-face interviews with health ...

This contribution sets out to consider certain ethical & methodological issues raised by the conduct of investigations in situations of extreme violence. It proposes to explore the relationship with the specific "object" in terms of researchers' responsibility toward the people about whom their research is conducted. That approach is based primarily on the development of a "comprehensive" sociology from the perspective of meaning, with the aim of entering the subjectivity of the other person. Within the context of extreme violence, such an approach poses increased difficulties, which this article endeavors to explore. That involves the researcher in constant, complex critical analysis of situations that disrupt all his or her bearings. Making the other person not simply an "object" but a "subject" of research also means going beyond categories that might constrain the researcher & entails continuous linkage of individual & collective histories. This naturally raises questions concerning not only the investigative but also the analytical techniques employed by the researcher. 1 Photograph, 18 References. Adapted from the source document.

This contribution sets out to consider certain ethical and methodological issues raised by the conduct of investigations in situations of extreme violence. It proposes to explore the relationship with the specific 'object' in terms of researchers' responsibility toward the people about whom their research is conducted. That approach is based primarily on the development of a 'comprehensive' sociology from the perspective of meaning, with the aim of entering the subjectivity of the other person. Within the context of extreme violence, such an approach poses increased difficulties, which this article endeavors to explore. That involves the researcher in constant, complex critical analysis of situations that disrupt all his or her bearings. Making the other person not simply an 'object' but a 'subject' of research also means going beyond categories that might constrain the researcher and entails continuous linkage of individual and collective histories. This naturally raises questions concerning not only the investigative but also the analytical techniques employed by the researcher. 1 Photograph, 18 References. (Original abstract - amended)

This contribution sets out to consider certain ethical and methodological issues raised by the conduct of investigations in situations of extreme violence. It proposes to explore the relationship with the specific 'object' in terms of researchers' responsibility towards the people about whom their research is conducted. That approach is based primarily on the development of a 'comprehensive' sociology from the perspective of meaning, with the aim of entering the subjectivity of the other person. Within the context of extreme violence, such an approach poses increased difficulties, which this article endeavours to explore. That involves the researcher in constant, complex critical analysis of situations that disrupt all his or her bearings. Making the other person not simply an 'object' but a 'subject' of research also means going beyond categories that might constrain the researcher and entails continuous linkage of individual and collective histories. This naturally raises questions concerning not only the investigative but also the analytical techniques employed by the researcher.

Developments in the theoretical field of ecosophy have demonstrated the co-dependence of different human and natural factors, as well as connections between societal organization, natural sustainability and individual experience. Exploring these complex and organic relations between the social, the mental and the environmental, is an important task for contemporary research. A central question is where and how such research can be undertaken. This article traces central ecosophical lines of thinking, links them to ethic and aesthetic theory, and shows how these theories stand in a direct relation to three contemporary, on-going art projects. Ecosophy is proposed as a relational and practice-near research ideology, depending on the complexity-oriented principles of relationality, ethicality and immediacy. Finally, aesthetic research and research through art emerge as field-merging and practical-theoretical approaches, which should be given more attention and resources in current science and education politics. As an alternative field of knowledge production, referring to Jacques Ranciéres 'distribution of the sensuous' as well as phenomenological epistemology, ethic-aesthetic research not only constitutes new ways of sensing, but acknowledges larger parts of what we already know. ; This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.