Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
| Autor/inn/en | Wood, Lesley; Kahts-Kramer, Samantha |
|---|---|
| Titel | 'But How Will You Ensure the Objectivity of the Researcher?' Guidelines to Address Possible Misconceptions about the Ethical Imperatives of Community-Based Research |
| Quelle | In: Research Ethics, 19 (2023) 1, S.1-17 (17 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift
PDF als Volltext |
| Zusatzinformation | ORCID (Wood, Lesley) |
| Sprache | englisch |
| Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz |
| ISSN | 1747-0161 |
| DOI | 10.1177/17470161221135882 |
| Schlagwörter | Ethics; Misconceptions; African American Community; Foreign Countries; Researchers; Higher Education; School Community Relationship; Action Research; Participatory Research; Community Involvement; South Africa |
| Abstract | Many reviewers of applications for ethical approval of research at universities struggle to understand what is considered ethical conduct in community-based research (CBR). Their difficulty in understanding CBR and the ethics embedded within it is, in part, due to the exclusion of CBR from researchers' mandatory research ethics training. After all, CBR challenges both pedagogically and epistemologically the dominant paradigm/s whose worldviews, values and inherent structures of power help sustain the status quo within academic institutions at large. Consequently, CBR ethics applications are often prolonged due to back-and-forth rebuttals. In this article, we analyse our experiences in a South African institution of the ethics approval process for our various CBR projects over the past couple of years. Data for this purpose was generated from analysis of our reflexive dialogues as well as our responses to feedback from the ethics review boards. To help support the trustworthiness of the study, we invited critical friends to a workshop to engage with our findings. We identified three main themes all associated with how the values, worldviews and approaches of CBR differ from those of the dominant research paradigm/s, that impeded on the progress of our applications through the ethics approval process. On the basis of our analysis, we offer guidelines and a participatory research checklist for university ethics review panels to help inform their evaluation of applications concerning CBR. While universities now actively promote community engagement initiatives, and since CBR is an efficacious approach to that end, we advocate for inclusion of CBR ethics in universities' mandatory ethics training, to help address ethical concerns that impede CBR research. (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 |
Literaturbeschaffung und Bestandsnachweise in Bibliotheken prüfen
Permalink als QR-Code
Inhalt auf sozialen Plattformen teilen (nur vorhanden, wenn Javascript eingeschaltet ist)
Teile diese Seite:
