A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z  

  First | 1 2 3 4        [Sort alphabetically]   [Restore default list]

  Subjects -> PHILOSOPHY (Total: 762 journals)
Showing 601 - 135 of 135 Journals sorted by number of followers
Analítica     Open Access   (Followers: 6)
Journal of East Asian Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Journal of Modern Philosophy     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
International Journal of Philosophy and Theology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Journal of the Sociology and Theory of Religion     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Food Ethics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Whiteness and Education     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Agora     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Cuadernos de pensamiento     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Aesthetic Investigations     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Culture and Dialogue     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Spiritual Formation and Soul Care     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Ajatus : Suomen Filosofisen Yhdistyksen vuosikirja     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Zeszyty Naukowe Centrum Badań im. Edyty Stein     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Laisvalaikio Tyrimai     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
International Journal of Ethics Education     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Universitas : Revista de Filosofía, Derecho y Política     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Zeitschrift für Ethik und Moralphilosophie : Journal for Ethics and Moral Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Problema Anuario de Filosofía y Teoría del Derecho     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Islamic Ethics     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Agora: papeles de Filosofía     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
ANFUSINA : Journal of Psychology     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Bioethica     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
TheoLogica : An International Journal for Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Philosophia : Revista de Filosofía     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Gnosis : Journal of Gnostic Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Islamic Sciences     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
International Journal of Divination and Prognostication     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Applied Animal Ethics Research     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Clotho     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
An-Nisbah : Jurnal Ekonomi Syariah     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
The Biblical Annals     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Al-Fikra     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Islamic Education     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Scientonomy : Journal for the Science of Science     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
International Journal of Innovation Studies     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Estudios Nietzsche     Open Access  
Bergsoniana     Open Access  
Histoire Épistémologie Langage     Open Access  
Ancient Philosophy Today     Hybrid Journal  
Endowment Studies     Hybrid Journal  
Danish Yearbook of Philosophy     Full-text available via subscription  
Journal for Continental Philosophy of Religion     Full-text available via subscription  
Simone de Beauvoir Studies     Full-text available via subscription  
Journal of Urdu Studies     Hybrid Journal  
Journal of Responsible Technology     Open Access  
Journal of Values Education / Değerler Eğitimi Dergisi     Open Access  
Conciencia     Open Access  
Correspondences : Journal for the Study of Esotericism     Open Access  
Resonancias : Revista de Filosofía     Open Access  
Res Humanitariae     Open Access  
Humanidades em diálogo     Open Access  
Discurso     Open Access  
Cadernos de Filosofia Alemã : Crítica e Modernidade     Open Access  
Cadernos de Ética e Filosofia Política     Open Access  
Cadernos Espinosanos     Open Access  
Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations     Open Access  
Dianoia     Open Access  
Saberes y Prácticas : Revista de Filosofía y Educación     Open Access  
Ciência & Trópico     Open Access  
Філософія та політологія в контексті сучасної культури (Philosophy and Political Science in the Context of Modern Culture)     Open Access  
Etcétera : Revista del Área de Ciencias Sociales del CIFFyH     Open Access  
Jurnal Konseling Gusjigang     Open Access  
Science et Esprit     Open Access  
Canadian Journal of Bioethics     Open Access  
Journal of Educational Thought / Revue de la Pensée Educative     Full-text available via subscription  
Auslegung : A Journal of Philosophy     Open Access  
PhaenEx     Open Access  
International Journal of Philosophy & Social Values     Open Access  
Convivium : Revista de Filosophia     Open Access  
Aurora : papeles del Seminario María Zambrano     Open Access  
Astrolabio     Open Access  
IJIBE (International Journal of Islamic Business Ethics)     Open Access  
International Gramsci Journal     Open Access  
Andrews University Seminary Student Journal     Open Access  
SPICE : Student Perspectives on Institutions, Choices & Ethic     Open Access  
Patristica et Mediævalia     Open Access  
Cuadernos de Filosofía     Open Access  
RUDN Journal of Philosophy     Open Access  
Revista Fragmentos de Cultura : Revista Interdisciplinar de Ciências Humanas     Open Access  
Temporal : Prática e Pensamento Contemporâneos     Open Access  
Revista Brasileira de Filosofia da Religião     Open Access  
Revista Brasileira de Bioética     Open Access  
Ítaca     Open Access  
Analytica : Revista de Filosofia     Open Access  
Anais de Filosofia Clássica     Open Access  
AL-Qadissiya Magzine for Human Sciences     Open Access  
Oksident     Open Access  
Diferencia(s)     Open Access  
Philosophical Inquiry in Education     Open Access  
Τέλος : Revista Iberoamericana de Estudios Utilitaristas     Open Access  
Frónesis     Open Access  
Sapientia     Open Access  
Discusiones Filosóficas     Open Access  
Universidad de La Habana     Open Access  
Anais Eletrônicos do Congresso Epistemologias do Sul     Open Access  
Revista SURES     Open Access  
Revista Eletrônica Ludus Scientiae     Open Access  
Revista Epistemologias do Sul     Open Access  
Cracow Indological Studies     Open Access  
Australasian Philosophical Review     Full-text available via subscription  
Jus Cogens : A Critical Journal of Philosophy of Law and Politics     Hybrid Journal  
Journal of Dharma Studies     Hybrid Journal  
Humanistic Management Journal     Hybrid Journal  
Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte     Hybrid Journal  
Via Spiritus : Revista de História da Espiritualidade e do Sentimento Religioso     Open Access  
Filosofia. Revista da Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto     Open Access  
Civitas Augustiniana     Open Access  
Revista Binacional Brasil - Argentina: Diálogo entre as ciências     Open Access  
Revista de Estudios Kantianos     Open Access  
Journal of Graduate Studies Review     Open Access  
HiN : Alexander von Humboldt im Netz. Internationale Zeitschrift für Humboldt-Studien     Open Access  
Dios y el Hombre     Open Access  
Bulletin of Yaroslav Mudryi NLU : Series : Philosophy, philosophy of law, political science, sociology     Open Access  
Sincronía     Open Access  
Isonomía. Revista de Teoría y Filosofía del Derecho     Open Access  
Journal of Analytic Divinity     Open Access  
Cahiers de Philosophie de l’Université de Caen     Open Access  
Heroism Science     Open Access  
FOKUS : Jurnal Kajian Keislaman dan Kemasyarakatan     Open Access  
BELAJEA : Jurnal Pendidikan Islam     Open Access  
AJIS : Academic Journal of Islamic Studies     Open Access  
The Islamic Culture     Open Access  
Teologia i Moralność     Open Access  
Studia z Kognitywistyki i Filozofii Umysłu     Open Access  
Filozofia Publiczna i Edukacja Demokratyczna     Open Access  
Bohemistyka     Open Access  
Ethics in Progress     Open Access  
Cuadernos de Filosofía Latinoamericana     Open Access  
Norsk filosofisk tidsskrift     Open Access  
Kirke og Kultur     Full-text available via subscription  
Problemos     Open Access  
Global Forum on Arts and Christian Faith     Open Access  
Gogoa     Open Access  
Lato Sensu : Revue de la Société de philosophie des sciences     Open Access  
Mutatis Mutandis : Revista Internacional de Filosofía     Open Access  
Ruch Filozoficzny     Open Access  
O Que Nos Faz Pensar : Cadernos do Departamento de Filosofia da PUC-Rio     Open Access  
Les Cahiers philosophiques de Strasbourg     Open Access  
Philosophie antique : Problèmes, Renaissances, Usages     Full-text available via subscription  
Studi di Estetica     Open Access  
Hic Rhodus : Crisis capitalista, polémica y controversias     Open Access  
El Banquete de los Dioses     Open Access  
Psocial : Revista de Investigación en Psicología Social     Open Access  
Windsor Yearbook of Access to Justice / Recueil annuel de Windsor d'accès à la justice     Open Access  
Éthique en éducation et en formation : Les Dossiers du GREE     Open Access  
Mizar : Costellazione di pensieri     Open Access  
Revista Poiesis     Open Access  
HONAI : International Journal for Educational, Social, Political & Cultural Studies     Open Access  
INSANCITA : Journal of Islamic Studies in Indonesia and Southeast Asia     Open Access  
Marwah : Jurnal Perempuan, Agama dan Jender     Open Access  
FALAH : Jurnal Ekonomi Syariah     Open Access  
Mises : Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy, Law and Economics     Open Access  
ULUM : Journal of Religious Inquiries     Open Access  
Voluntaristics Review     Open Access  
Scrinium : Journal of Patrology and Critical Hagiography     Open Access  
Idéias     Open Access  
Diakrisis Yearbook of Theology and Philosophy     Open Access  
Jurnal Living Hadis     Open Access  
Epistemología e Historia de la Ciencia     Open Access  
Kader     Open Access  
Metaphysics     Open Access  
Griot : Revista de Filosofia     Open Access  
Kontemplasi : Jurnal Ilmu-Ilmu Ushuluddin     Open Access  
Jurnal Dinamika Penelitian : Media Komunikasi Penelitian Sosial Keagamaan     Open Access  

  First | 1 2 3 4        [Sort alphabetically]   [Restore default list]

Similar Journals
Journal Cover
Research Ethics
Journal Prestige (SJR): 0.249
Number of Followers: 8  

  This is an Open Access Journal Open Access journal
ISSN (Print) 1747-0161 - ISSN (Online) 2047-6094
Published by Sage Publications Homepage  [1175 journals]
  • Editorial: Complaints mechanisms in research: are they fit for
           purpose'

    • Authors: Kate Chatfield
      Pages: 263 - 264
      Abstract: Research Ethics, Volume 18, Issue 4, Page 263-264, October 2022.

      Citation: Research Ethics
      PubDate: 2022-09-21T06:50:34Z
      DOI: 10.1177/17470161221127329
      Issue No: Vol. 18, No. 4 (2022)
       
  • ‘But how will you ensure the objectivity of the researcher'’
           Guidelines to address possible misconceptions about the ethical
           imperatives of community-based research

    • Authors: Lesley Wood, Samantha Kahts-Kramer
      Abstract: Research Ethics, Ahead of Print.
      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.
      Citation: Research Ethics
      PubDate: 2022-11-22T07:17:56Z
      DOI: 10.1177/17470161221135882
       
  • Engaging key stakeholders to overcome barriers to studying the quality of
           research ethics oversight

    • Authors: Emily E Anderson, Elisa A Hurley, Kimberley Serpico, Ann Johnson, Jessica Rowe, Megan Singleton, Barbara E Bierer, Brooke Cholka, Swapnali Chaudhari, Holly Fernandez Lynch
      Abstract: Research Ethics, Ahead of Print.
      The primary purpose of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) is to protect the rights and welfare of human research participants. Evaluation and measurement of how IRBs satisfy this purpose and other important goals are open questions that demand empirical research. Research on IRBs, and the Human Research Protection Programs (HRPPs) of which they are often a part, is necessary to inform evidence-based practices, policies, and approaches to quality improvement in human research protections. However, to date, HRPP and IRB engagement in empirical research about their own activities and performance has been limited. To promote engagement of HRPPs and IRBs in self-reflective research on HRPP and IRB quality and effectiveness, barriers to their participation need to be addressed. These include: extensive workloads, limited information technology systems, and few universally accepted or consistently measured metrics for HRPP/IRB quality and effectiveness. Additionally, institutional leaders may have concerns about confidentiality. Professional norms around the value of participating in this type of research are lacking. Lastly, obtaining external funding for research on IRBs and HRPPs is challenging. As a group of HRPP professionals and researchers actively involved in a research consortium focused on IRB quality and effectiveness, we identify potential levers for supporting and encouraging HRPP and IRB engagement in research on quality and effectiveness. We maintain that this research should be informed by the core principles of patient- and community-engaged research, in which members and key stakeholders of the community to be studied are included as key informants and members of the research team. This ensures that relevant questions are asked and that data are interpreted to produce meaningful recommendations. As such, we offer several ways to increase the participation of HRPP professionals in research as participants, as data sharers, and as investigators.
      Citation: Research Ethics
      PubDate: 2022-11-18T10:39:58Z
      DOI: 10.1177/17470161221138028
       
  • Safeguarding research staff “in the field”: a blind spot in
           ethics guidelines

    • Authors: Lennart Kaplan, Jana Kuhnt, Laura E Picot, Catherine Fallon Grasham
      Abstract: Research Ethics, Ahead of Print.
      Across disciplines there is a large and increasing number of research projects that rely on data collection activities in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, these are accompanied by an extensive range of ethical challenges. While the safeguarding of study participants is the primary aim of existing ethics guidelines, this paper argues that this “do no harm” principle should be extended to include research staff. This study is a comprehensive review of more than 80 existing ethics guidelines and protocols that reveals a lack of safeguarding research staff regarding the ethical challenges faced during data collection activities in LMICs. This is particularly the case when it comes to issues such as power imbalances, political risk, staff’s emotional wellbeing or dealing with feelings of guilt. Lead organizations are called upon to develop guiding principles that encompass the safeguarding of research staff, which are then to be adapted and translated into specific protocols and tools by institutions.
      Citation: Research Ethics
      PubDate: 2022-11-15T06:15:43Z
      DOI: 10.1177/17470161221131494
       
  • Authorship disputes and patient research participation: collaborating
           across backgrounds

    • Authors: Will Hall
      Abstract: Research Ethics, Ahead of Print.
      Public participation and survivor research in mental health are widely recognized as vital to the field. At the same time, contributions of patient collaborators can present unique challenges to determining authorship. Using an unresolved dispute around research contributions to the American Psychiatric Association’s Psychiatric Services journal, authorship and contribution are addressed. Recommendations are suggested to prevent dilemmas and achieve responsible research credit inclusion, especially among researchers with different backgrounds and asymmetric power relations. Researchers and publishers can prepare proactively for conflict through consensus on authorship criteria, prior agreements around author inclusion, arrangement for third party dispute resolution, transparency in communication and contracts, notification to prospective publications of pending disputes, a contributor-guarantor model of contribution, journal editor “expressions of concern” when authorship disputes go unresolved, and expectation of conflict as generative.
      Citation: Research Ethics
      PubDate: 2022-11-10T08:57:19Z
      DOI: 10.1177/17470161221134023
       
  • Peer review and the pillar of salt: a case study

    • Authors: James Lawrence Powell
      Abstract: Research Ethics, Ahead of Print.
      Peer review has long been regarded as the gold standard of scientific publication, essential to the integrity of science itself. But, as any publishing scientist knows, peer review has its downside, including long delays and reviewer bias. Until the coming of the Internet, there appeared to be no alternative. Now, articles appear online as preprints almost immediately upon submission. But they lack peer review and thus their scientific standing can be questioned. Post-publication discussion platforms such as PubPeer have proven useful, but are no substitute for pre-publication peer review. Nevertheless, some may be tempted to believe that peer review can now be done without. This article challenges that view by analyzing a recent, non-peer-reviewed article in Skeptical Enquirer, a magazine published by the Committee for Skeptical Enquiry (CSI). The article, “Sodom Meteor Strike Claims Should Be Taken With a Pillar of Salt,” casts doubt on one of the most widely read scientific articles of the last decade and provides a stern warning of the cost of abandoning peer review.
      Citation: Research Ethics
      PubDate: 2022-11-01T11:05:35Z
      DOI: 10.1177/17470161221131491
       
  • Overcoming barriers to informed consent in neurological research:
           Perspectives from a national survey

    • Authors: Lauren R Sankary, Megan E Zelinsky, Paul J Ford, Eric C Blackstone, Robert J Fox
      Abstract: Research Ethics, Ahead of Print.
      The ethical recruitment of participants with neurological disorders in clinical research requires obtaining initial and ongoing informed consent. The purpose of this study is to characterize barriers faced by research personnel in obtaining informed consent from research participants with neurological disorders and to identify strategies applied by researchers to overcome those barriers. This study was designed as a web-based survey of US researchers with an optional follow-up interview. A subset of participants who completed the survey were selected using a stratified purposeful sampling strategy and invited to participate in an in-depth qualitative interview by phone or video conference. Data were analyzed using a mixed methods approach, including content analysis of survey responses and thematic analysis of interview responses. Over 1 year, 113 survey responses were received from US research personnel directly involved in obtaining informed consent from participants in neurological research. Frequently identified barriers to informed consent included: cognitive and communication impairments (e.g. aphasia), unrealistic expectations of research participants, mistrust of medical research, time constraints, literacy barriers, lack of available social support, and practical or resource-related constraints. Strategies to enhance informed consent included: involving close others to support participant understanding of study-related information, collaborating with more experienced research personnel to facilitate training in obtaining informed consent, encouraging participants to review consent forms in advance of consent discussions, and using printed materials and visual references. Beyond conveying study-related information, researchers included in this study endorsed ethical responsibilities to support deliberation necessary to informed consent in the context of misconceptions about research, unrealistic expectations, limited understanding, mistrust, and/or pressure from close others. Findings highlight the importance of training researchers involved in obtaining informed consent in neurological research to address disease-specific challenges and to support the decision-making processes of potential research participants and their close others.
      Citation: Research Ethics
      PubDate: 2022-10-31T06:32:46Z
      DOI: 10.1177/17470161221131497
       
  • WITHDRAWN—Administrative Duplicate Publication: Research ethics
           committees: The ineligibles

    • Abstract: Research Ethics, Ahead of Print.

      Citation: Research Ethics
      PubDate: 2022-09-30T11:32:49Z
      DOI: 10.1177/17470161221125530
       
  • Informed consent in a tuberculosis genetic study in Cameroon: information
           overload, situational vulnerability and diagnostic misconception

    • Authors: Ali Ibrahim Mohammed-Ali, Eyoab Iyasu Gebremeskel, Emmanuel Yenshu, Theobald Nji, Apungwa Cornelius Ntabe, Samuel Wanji, Godfrey B Tangwa, Nchangwi Syntia Munung
      First page: 265
      Abstract: Research Ethics, Ahead of Print.
      Concerns around comprehension and recall of consent information by research participants have typically been associated with low health and research literacy levels. In genomics research, this concern is heightened as the scientific and ethical complexities of genetics research, such as biobanking, genetic susceptibility, data sharing, and incidental findings may be more difficult for potential research participants to understand. However, challenges to research participants’ comprehension of consent information may be compounded by factors beyond health and research literacy levels. To identify factors that may impact research participants’ understanding and recall of consent information, we designed a qualitative study to explore whether participants enrolled in a tuberculosis genetics study (TBGEN-Africa) in Cameroon understood the objectives of the study, the risks and benefits and certain key aspects of the study such as biobanking and data sharing. The results showed that research participants had limited understanding and/or recall of the TBGEN-Africa study goals and methods. Some participants were of the opinion that TBGEN-Africa was not a genetics study because tuberculosis is not an inheritable condition. Factors that may have hindered understanding and/or recall of study information are diagnostic misconception (research participants consider research as part of medical diagnosis), and information overload and situational vulnerability (consent at a time of physical and emotional distress). There is a need for improved practices to support research participants’ understanding of consent information in genetics studies including designing the consent process in ways that minimize psychological distress and diagnostic/therapeutic misconception.
      Citation: Research Ethics
      PubDate: 2022-06-14T07:11:51Z
      DOI: 10.1177/17470161221106674
       
  • Can an ethics code help to achieve equity in international research
           collaborations' Implementing the global code of conduct for research
           in resource-poor settings in India and Pakistan

    • Authors: Kate Chatfield, Catherine Elizabeth Lightbody, Ifikar Qayum, Heather Ohly, Marena Ceballos Rasgado, Caroline Watkins, Nicola M Lowe
      First page: 281
      Abstract: Research Ethics, Ahead of Print.
      The Global Code of Conduct for Research in Resource-Poor Settings (GCC) aims to stop the export of unethical research practices from higher to lower income settings. Launched in 2018, the GCC was immediately adopted by European Commission funding streams for application in research that is situated in lower and lower-middle income countries. Other institutions soon followed suit. This article reports on the application of the GCC in two of the first UK-funded projects to implement this new code, one situated in India and one in Pakistan. Through systematic ethics evaluation of both projects, the practical application of the GCC in real-world environments was tested. The findings of this ethics evaluation suggest that while there are challenges for implementation, application of the GCC can promote equity in international research collaborations.
      Citation: Research Ethics
      PubDate: 2022-07-07T10:05:41Z
      DOI: 10.1177/17470161221111059
       
  • Principlism and citizen science: the possibilities and limitations of
           principlism for guiding responsible citizen science conduct

    • Authors: Patrik Baard, Per Sandin
      First page: 304
      Abstract: Research Ethics, Ahead of Print.
      Citizen science (CS) has been presented as a novel form of research relevant for social concerns and global challenges. CS transforms the roles of participants to being actively involved at various stages of research processes, CS projects are dynamic, and pluralism arises when many non-professional researchers take an active involvement in research. Some argue that these elements all make existing research ethical principles and regulations ill-suited for guiding responsible CS conduct. However, while many have sought to highlight such challenges from CS, few have discussed principles per se providing the foundation for regulations. In this article we will investigate the possibilities of midlevel principlism in guiding responsible CS conduct. Principlism has the potential of accommodating many of the concerns taken to reduce the relevance of existing principles.
      Citation: Research Ethics
      PubDate: 2022-08-03T11:32:58Z
      DOI: 10.1177/17470161221116558
       
  • Ethics review and conversation analysis

    • Authors: Jeffrey P Aguinaldo
      First page: 319
      Abstract: Research Ethics, Ahead of Print.
      In this case study, I address the procedural ethics of conversation analysis (CA) and the collection of naturally occurring mundane interactions. I draw from the challenges that emerged from the institutional ethics review of the HIV, health and interaction study (the H2I Study), a CA project that sought to identify the practices through which normative assumptions of HIV and other health conditions are produced in conversations. Consistent with CA’s preference for naturally occurring interactions, the H2I Study collected and analysed everyday telephone calls involving people living with HIV. This article offers practical strategies CA researchers might use to navigate two ethical concerns raised about the collection of naturally occurring mundane interactions. The first questions the merits of collecting naturally occurring mundane interactions. For those unfamiliar with CA, the specific advantages of analysing naturally occurring mundane interactions may not be self-evident. This places an evidentiary burden on CA researchers to warrant the collection of this type of data. To address this concern, I suggest demonstrating in ethics applications the analytic value of CA using publicly available interactions. The second concern questions the use of verbal consent necessary for the collection of naturally occurring mundane interactions. Like most CA research, the H2I Study required flexible informed consent protocols appropriate for spontaneous and unpredictable interactions. Drawing from within and outside the CA literature, I offer three rationales for the use of verbal consent. This article is written as a practical resource for conversation analysts seeking approval from their research ethics board (REB) and for REBs who might be unfamiliar with CA research. This article contributes to a small but growing body of literature that documents not only the kinds of challenges CA researchers encounter from institutional ethics review, but the specific procedural ethics they may employ to secure ethics approval.
      Citation: Research Ethics
      PubDate: 2022-08-02T11:47:38Z
      DOI: 10.1177/17470161221116552
       
  • Perceived publication pressure and research misconduct: should we be too
           bothered with a causal relationship'

    • Authors: Nicole Shu Ling Yeo-Teh, Bor Luen Tang
      First page: 329
      Abstract: Research Ethics, Ahead of Print.
      Publication pressure has been touted to promote questionable research practices (QRP) and scientific or research misconduct (RM). However, logically attractively as it is, there is no unequivocal evidence for this notion, and empirical studies have produced conflicting results. Other than difficulties in obtaining unbiased empirical data, a direct causal relationship between perceived publication pressure (PPP) and QRP/RM is inherently difficult to establish, because the former is a complex biopsychosocial construct that is variedly influenced by multiple personal and environmental factors. To effectively address QRP/RM by tackling the sources of PPP would also be difficult because of the competitive nature of the reward and merit system of contemporary science. We might do better with efforts in enhancing knowledge in research ethics and integrity among the practitioners, as well as institutional infrastructures and mechanisms to fairly and efficiently adjudicate cases of QRP/RM.
      Citation: Research Ethics
      PubDate: 2022-09-17T12:09:08Z
      DOI: 10.1177/17470161221125097
       
 
JournalTOCs
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Email: journaltocs@hw.ac.uk
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
 


Your IP address: 18.232.56.9
 
Home (Search)
API
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-