Contextualising Creative Practice Within Human Research Ethics Processes
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12909552 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sue Joseph (0000-0003-4978-6633, University of Saint Joseph, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2013 |
| Volume | 8 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 96-109 |
| Publication date | 2013-06-14 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journalism Practice (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1751-2786 • E-ISSN: 1751-2794 |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/17512786.2013.803829 |
| OpenAlex | W2094992942 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 11 |
Australian creative practice researchers are not alone in their quest for an appropriate framework for human ethics research committee consent. Globally, there seem to be similar tensions. Although Australia's National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research was revamped in 2007 to be more inclusive of specific creative practice research, including long-form journalism and other creative non-fiction writing, many tertiary Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) have not evolved with it. Instead, a conservative stasis pertaining to the previous medical/scientific paradigm remains the default position. This paper details a submission to an Australian university's HREC calling for a human ethics application process that more appropriately contextualises creative practice human research. Additionally, it proposes an informed consent letter that addresses tensions around the withdrawal of “data” based on the journalistic practice of “on the record/off the record”. The revised Australian National Statement has given creative practice-led academics the ability to improve the ethical clearance process—the mechanisms are there within the National Statement. By highlighting the counter-productive restraints and constraints some conservative HRECs still place on the functioning of journalistic and other creative non-fiction writing research within universities, this paper calls for a uniform and national collaboration to investigate review other than by HREC as a matter of urgency for all Australian journalism and creative practice researchers, based on the more intuitive and streamlined content model already utilised at a UK university
Engineering ethics · Human research · Journalism · Media studies · Political science · Public relations · Research ethics · Sociology · Statement (logic · Engineering · Ethics in Clinical Research · Law · Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics · Social Science and Policy Research
Research Ethics for Social Scientists
Recounting Traumatic Secrets
Against the ethicists
Rethinking Ethics Review as Institutional Discourse
Political Research and Human Research Ethics Committees
Unintended consequences of human research ethics committees
Accounting for Ethos or Programmes for Conduct? The Brave New World of Research Ethics Committees
| Citations per year | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |