Year-end Sale % OFF 
Abstract
In the United States, the “common law,” that regulates ethics review is being overhauled. We ask how UK University Research Ethics Committees (U-RECs), following the American model, have been able to shape social-science research without much commotion, and whether it is time for change. Despite the misbehavior of some ethnographic researchers, most social science research is valued for and motivated by its expert engagement with moral questions regarding discrimination, unfairness, exploitation, and so on, at home and abroad: knowledge of and sensitivity to the complexities around the violation of socio-economic, political, and cultural norms and values are carried high in the social science banner. Yet, since the 1990s, social science research projects in the Anglo-American world have increasingly entrusted research ethics to the scrutiny of U-RECs. This ethical delegation gives a mandate to U-RECs, often without suitable expertise, to vet research projects in a bureaucratic and time-consuming manner. It does not just lead to misunderstandings and frustration; it also privileges research as defined by research ethics committees rather than in negotiation with the ethics we encounter “in the field.” Although formal research ethics is clearly confusing early career researchers (and others!) about the role of ethics (which?), its forms have come to shape our disciplines. How did we get there? How do we move forward?
Highlights
The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:
To unburden institutional review boards (IRBs), the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM, July 2011) entitled “Human Subjects Research Protections: Enhancing Protections for Research Subjects and Reducing Burden, Delay, and Ambiguity for Investigators”, proposes to create a new category of “excused” research for studies “posing only informational risks” (Federal Register 2015). This new development in the administration of research ethics in the USA seems to return the responsibility for ethics review to the research professions and departments, while in Europe, research ethics is increasingly institutionalised and centralised, risking estrangement from the research profession
On the basis of discussions at an international symposium we held in November 2015 in Sussex and a colloquium in September 2016 in Durham, a group of researchers, and representatives of funding organisations (ESRC, early career researchers (ERCs), Wellcome Trust) and ethics committees, and professional organisations for anthropology and sociology (BSA, ASA) discussed the questions ‘Have we become too ethical’ and ‘How can we become more ethical’
Summary
Citation for published item: Sleeboom-Faulkner, M. and Simpson, R. and Burgos-Martinez, E. and McMurray, J. (2017) 'The formalization of social-science research ethics : how did we get there?', HAU : journal of ethnographic theory., 7 (1). To unburden institutional review boards (IRBs), the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM, July 2011) entitled “Human Subjects Research Protections: Enhancing Protections for Research Subjects and Reducing Burden, Delay, and Ambiguity for Investigators”, proposes to create a new category of “excused” research for studies “posing only informational risks” (Federal Register 2015) This new development in the administration of research ethics in the USA seems to return the responsibility for ethics review to the research professions and departments, while in Europe, research ethics is increasingly institutionalised and centralised, risking estrangement from the research profession. Since the 1990s, social science-research projects in the Anglo-American world have increasingly delegated research ethics to the scrutiny of University Research Ethics Committees (U-RECs), which may delegate the review to lower administrative levels, such as schools or departments1 This ethical entrustment gives a mandate to U-RECs, which may not always have suitable expertise, to vet research projects. On the basis of our research, an international symposium, a colloquium and a survey we discuss how we found ourselves in this position and we will make some suggestions on how to move forward
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
