Beyond ‘do no harm’? On the need for a dynamic approach to research ethics
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8360811 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Daniel Hammett (0000-0002-9607-6901, University of Johannesburg, corresponding author), Lucy Jackson (0000-0003-0467-1533, University of Sheffield), Ryan Bramley (0000-0002-4984-2626, University of Sheffield) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 54 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 582-590 |
| Publication date | 2022-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Area (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0004-0894 • E-ISSN: 1475-4762 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/area.12795 |
| OpenAlex | W4293582580 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 25 |
| References cited | 50 |
Despite ongoing critical engagements with the remit and functioning of research ethics boards and review processes – not least in the limitations of transposing medico‐scientific ethics approaches to the social sciences – the need for ethical practice in research is well established and accepted. Consequently, we see the ubiquitous requirement for academic social science research – whether by an undergraduate student, a PhD candidate, or an established professor – to undergo ethical review. Despite (or perhaps because of) this ubiquity in expectation, engagement with research ethics often remains perfunctory, formulaic, and procedural. Too often research ethics is reduced to a bureaucratic hurdle, a singular moment of approval that overlooks the dynamic, messy, and complex realities of the research journey. Moreover, this reductionist approach to research ethics is often replicated in teaching and training and reinforced as review duties are subsumed into the general administrative burden of academic life. How, then, might we move beyond the procedural and static to a substantive and dynamic research ethics process? Building on existing debates, we set out a number of possible strategies for realising this aim – not only in individual practice but linked to institutional processes in the set‐up and management of ethics review, and opportunities for promoting the teaching of research ethics in a dynamic manner
Applied ethics · Bureaucracy · Engineering ethics · Epistemology · Harm · Information ethics · Meta-ethics · Political science · Politics · Reductionism · Research ethics · Set (abstract data type) · Sociology · Computer Science · Ethics in Clinical Research · Ethics in medical practice · Global Health and Surgery · Law
Mediated situational ethics in cross-cultural child participatory research
Renewed questions of ethics in research with and for children and young people
Reflecting on Ethical Processes and Dilemmas in Doctoral Research
How can we reform research ethics management to make it fit for purpose
Reconstructing ethics pedagogy
Doing ethics without a ‘Map’
Reimagining research ethics in applied linguistics and SLA
Challenges and opportunities during the Covid-19 pandemic
Ethics of care and participatory research relationships in a linguistic ethnographic study of wartime experience
Principles for ethical research in the Himalayas
Rethinking ethics in politically sensitive research
On the ethics of researching informal urbanism
Re‐Thinking the Imposter Participant
Uncomfortable geographies of research ethics
‘What is visible… and what isn't’
Constructing Identities in a Diverse School Setting
Remote collaborative fieldwork in the global South
Ethical Principles, Social Harm and the Economic Relations of Research
Informed Consent and Debriefing When Deceiving Participants
Crayons × Code
Ethical mediation
Beyond Judgment and Approval
Building Trust in Discontinuous Engagements
Under-Served in Qualitative Health Research
Multiples Ethical Dialogues in Domestic Abuse-Related Deaths and Perpetrator Studies
The introduction of research ethics review procedures at a university in South Africa
Ethics Are Admin
Reassessing the Role of the Biomedical Research Ethics Committee
If Ethics Committees were Designed for Ethnography
A ‘sense of failure’? Everydayness and research ethics
Power is not an evil’
So you’re literally taking the piss?! Critically analysing and accounting for ethics (and risk) in interdisciplinary research on children and plastics
Research ethics committees
What is wrong with ethics review, the impact on teaching anthropology, and how to fix it
Researcher vulnerability
Beyond 'Do No Harm
Promoting and Assessing ‘Deep Learning’ in Geography Fieldwork
Interactive Ethics
Developing a geographers' agenda for online research ethics
Un-ethical review? Why it is wrong to apply the medical model of research governance to human geography
When 'Do No Harm' Is Not Enough
Private life’ and ‘work life’
For a relationship perspective on geographical ethics
In and beyond the classroom
The ethics of (not) giving back
Ethics ≠ Law
Concealing researcher identity in fieldwork and social media
Leaving the field
Reflexive Research Ethics for Environmental Health and Justice
Administering Colonial Science
The University as the “Imagined Other
Ethics Creep
Illegal or unethical? Situated ethics in the context of a dual economy
Working with vulnerable groups in social research
Whose Interview Is It, Anyway? Methodological and Ethical Challenges of Insider-Outsider Research, Multiple Languages, and Dual-Researcher Cooperation
Ethics, Reflexivity, and "Ethically Important Moments" in Research
Does This Mean You're Not Going to Come Visit Me Anymore
Decolonising Methodologies Research and Indigenous Peoples
| Unique citing works | 25 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 6,25 |
| Citation span | 2022 - 2026 (5) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 24 |