Ethics Governance in Scottish Universities: How Can We Do Better? A Qualitative Study

Autor/inn/en	Dove, Edward S.; Douglas, Cristina
Titel	Ethics Governance in Scottish Universities: How Can We Do Better? A Qualitative Study
Quelle	In: Research Ethics, 19 (2023) 2, S.166-198 (33 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Dove, Edward S.)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1747-0161
DOI	10.1177/17470161221147801
Schlagwörter	Ethics; Universities; Foreign Countries; Administrator Attitudes; Advisory Committees; Online Systems; Best Practices; Research Projects; Research Administration; Faculty Workload; Resource Allocation; Career Development; Researchers; Models; Cooperation; Research Methodology; College Faculty; College Students; Governance; United Kingdom (Scotland) + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Ethik; University; Universität; Ausland; Beratungsstelle; Online; Forschungsvorhaben; Forschungsadministration; Ressourcenallokation; Berufsentwicklung; Researcher; Forscher; Analogiemodell; Co-operation; Kooperation; Research method; Forschungsmethode; Fakultät; Collegestudent; Education; Educational policy; Financing; Steuerung; Bildung; Erziehung; Bildungspolitik; Finanzierung
Abstract	While ethical norms for conducting academic research in the United Kingdom are relatively clear, there is little empirical understanding of how university research ethics committees (RECs) themselves operate and whether they are seen to operate well. In this article, we offer insights from a project focused on the Scottish university context. We deployed a three-sided qualitative approach: (i) document analysis; (ii) interviews with REC members, administrators, and managers; and (iii) direct observation of REC meetings. We found that RECs have diverse operation and vary in terms of what members understand to be the remit of their REC and what should constitute the content of ethics review. Overall, though, most participants perceive university RECs as operating well. When asked what they consider to be areas for further improvement, most commented on: implementation of an online system; more experience with how to evaluate various kinds of research projects; best practice exchange and training opportunities; more accurate reflection of the REC role as part of the university's workload allocation model; and greater recognition of the importance of research ethics governance in the university's research environment, and, for the members themselves, their career advancement. Based on our findings and subsequent discussions during an end-of-project roundtable with stakeholders, we propose a model of collaboration that can address some of the identified areas that could benefit from further improvement. This model would facilitate a heightened awareness of the importance of supporting REC members in their own effort in assisting students and staff alike in undertaking as ethically robust research as possible. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01