Articles for the Topic "Ethics"

Guidelines for Conducting Research with People who are Homeless

2010-06-16T09:28:36

York University has formulated policies for conduct of research involving human participants. This policy applies to all Faculties and the Libraries of the University. This policy is intended to serve as joint protection for the researcher, the study participant and the University in order to ensure attention to various rights and responsibilities of the respective parties to the research endeavour. The Human Participants Review Committee (HPRC) is responsible for ensuring that research involving human participants is consistent with the guidelines set by the University. The Senate of York University affirms that researchers must respect the safety, welfare, and dignity of human participants in their research and treat them equally, fairly, and not as a means to an end. The University values the academic freedom of its researchers, and the ethics review process shall not unfairly censor researchers who support unorthodox views. However, academic freedom is complemented by the requirement to respect the rights of human participants. The University's principal reference is the Tri-Council (SSHRC, NSERC, CIHR) Policy Statement (TCPS): Ethical Conduct For Research Involving Humans. The following guidelines for conducting research with people who are homeless have been developed in acknowledgment of the need for continuing interpretation and refinement of applicable policies to account for changes in research methods, contexts and cultures. Guidelines for conducting homelessness research have been developed in recognition that: a) people who are homeless are by definition a marginalized population that routinely experiences exploitation, and thus are in need of special considerations, and that b) certain sub-populations of the homeless (street youth, the mentally ill, for instance) may present special challenges for research and as a consequence require added protections. These guidelines have been developed in an effort to not only protect human participants, but to ensure that research with people who are homeless is conducted in a respectful manner that recognizes the special circumstances endured by people without housing. The following guidelines are in place to ensure respectful encounters with people who are homeless, minimize risk to research participants and are in keeping with the cardinal principles of ethics in research. These guidelines complement and build on those outlined by York University’s Human Participants Review Committee, the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, and the Government of Canada’s Ethical Guidelines for Conducting Research Involving Homeless People (2004).

NEW 8.4 Ethics in Research with Homeless Women

2010-06-30T11:58:46

This chapter applies feminist and community psychology ethics to the analysis of research with women who are homeless. The author examines the ethical questions that can arise throughout the research process, from the planning stage, through data collection and analysis, to the writing and dissemination of results and proposes strategies for transforming research with women who are homeless into a means for challenging oppression and promoting liberation. Research offers a means for psychologists to challenge the social injustice at the root of homelessness; however, it is vital that the research itself not reproduce this injustice in its process or products.

The Ethics of Conducting Community-Engaged Homelessness Research

2010-04-19T01:39:46

This paper focuses on some of the ethical issues which may arise when conducting research in the context of homelessness. These issues are considered from the viewpoints of researchers, research coordinators and interviewers, drawing from their extensive real world experience. In addition to negotiating the complex context of homelessness, community-based homelessness researchers need to address a number of ethical issues in research conception, design, implementation and dissemination. Although these issues are commonly considered in community-engaged research, research with people who are homeless may raise exceptional challenges. Such challenges include determining the nature of informed consent; protecting research participants and researchers, and determining appropriate compensation for participation. Understanding the context of homelessness to conduct ethical research will require sharing information and joint decision-making, processes that must include members of communities within which the research participants live. Furthermore, researchers should be sensitive to the changing context of homelessness, and vigilant for new ethical challenges.

Feminist and Community Psychology Ethics in Research with Homeless Women

2007-11-06T04:43:29

This paper presents a feminist and community psychology analysis of ethical concerns that can arise throughout the process of doing research with women who are homeless. The unique contexts of the lives of women who are homeless demand that researchers redefine traditional ethical constructs such as consent, privacy, harm, and bias. Research that fails to do this may perpetuate the stereotyping, marginalization, stigmatization, and victimization homeless women face. Feminist and community research ethics must go beyond the avoidance of harm to an active investment in the well-being of marginalized individuals and communities. Using feminist and community psychology ethics, this paper addresses some common problems in research with women who are homeless, and argues for the transformation of research from a tool for the advancement of science into a strategy for the empowerment of homeless women and their communities. (Author)

Ownership, Control, Access and Possession

2010-04-19T01:33:16

First Nations need to protect all information concerning themselves, their traditional knowledge and culture, including information resulting from research. The principles of Ownership, Control, Access and Possession (OCAP) enable self-determination over all research concerning First Nations. It offers a way for First Nations to make decisions regarding what research will be done, for what purpose information or data will be used, where the information will be physically stored and who will have access. This piece of work was sanctioned by the First Nations Information Governance Committee (FNIGC) and the First Nations Regional Longitudinal Health Survey (RHS). This guide explains the principles of OCAP and all that they encompass – from regulating the collection of data, to analyzing, managing and storing the data. It also provides some useful models in the form of policies, protocols, or strategies that reflect OCAP and have been adopted by First Nations to regulate all research activities that affect their people and communities. It also outlines key issues and concepts of OCAP, as well as existing barriers and challenges towards its implementation.

Ethics and Research with Aboriginal Communities

2010-04-19T01:27:11

This paper is based on ethical principles introduced in a chapter by Marc G. Stevenson entitled Negotiating Research Relationships with Aboriginal Communities: Ethical Considerations and Principles (Stevenson and Natcher 2009: 197-210). The reader is encouraged to consult this work for a better understanding of the full context in which these ethical principles were first presented. The following principles have been prepared to assist researchers and research partners conduct research involving Aboriginal peoples. The intent of the principles is to promote research that is scientifically and culturally competent, is in keeping with Aboriginal values and traditions, and is mutually beneficial and empowering to both Canada’s Aboriginal and research communities. Adherence to these principles will also facilitate, in the context of research, the reconciliation of Aboriginal rights and interests with those of other Canadians.

Research Involving Aboriginal Peoples

2010-09-24T12:59:51

The 2nd Edition of the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans” contains a new section on ethical requirements for research involving Aboriginal peoples.

Aboriginal Knowledge Translation: Understanding and Respecting the Distinct Needs of Aboriginal Communities in Research

2010-09-24T12:49:15

Aboriginal KT – using research to create positive change – is an ethical issue and pursuit. Canada’s Aboriginal (First Nation, Inuit, and Métis) Peoples are Canada’s First Peoples; as such, they have unique rights and responsibilities. Thus, research involving Aboriginal people requires particular consideration. Ethical guidelines have been articulated by national organizations, including the recent CIHR Guidelines for Health Research involving Aboriginal People4 and a new version of chapter nine – “Research Involving Aboriginal Peoples” – of the Tri-council Policy Statement.5 The 4 R’s of research – respect, reciprocity, relevance, and responsibility – originally described by Kirkness and Bernhardt6 are embedded in each of these guidelines and provide a simple framework for understanding and engaging in Aboriginal research ethics. The Ownership, Control, Access, Possession (OCAP) principles also provide guidance about how to conduct ethical health research with First Nations communities.7 Overall, these documents highlight the importance of including Aboriginal people in research and policy-making. This requires a focus both on the knowledge that is used and gathered and on the process of translation. These areas are discussed in detail below.

CIHR Guidelines for Health Research Involving Aboriginal People

2010-09-24T12:55:35

These Guidelines have been prepared by the Ethics Office of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), in conjunction with its Institute of Aboriginal Peoples' Health, to assist researchers and institutions in carrying out ethical and culturally competent research involving Aboriginal people. The intent is to promote health through research that is in keeping with Aboriginal values and traditions. The Guidelines will assist in developing research partnerships that will facilitate and encourage mutually beneficial and culturally competent research. The Guidelines will also promote ethics review that enables and facilitates rather than suppresses or obstructs research.

Guidelines for Ethical Conduct

2010-04-19T01:15:23

Canadian Evaluation Society's guidelines for ethical research.

Researching the margins: Strategies for ethical and rigorous research with marginalised communities

2011-02-25T11:39:48

Book Review: Conducting ethical and rigorous research to document health inequalities among marginalised populations is particularly difficult, especially when those populations may be seen as politically contentious. In the editors’ words, ‘Researching the margins’ is “a book about how to be a researcher with marginalised communities rather than a book about how to do research”. Undoubtedly the book achieves this aim. Through a series of case studies, the book discusses a number of challenges faced by those researching the margins. These challenges include definitional problems (e.g. who is in the margins and who is in the centre? Who is the researcher and the researched?), ethical problems (e.g. confidentiality and anonymity, payment to participants), operational problems (e.g. developing research questions, sampling and recruitment), and political considerations (e.g. reporting politically sensitive findings).

Standards for Evaluation in the UN System

2010-04-19T01:10:25

These standards build upon the Norms for Evaluation for the UN system. They are drawn from best practice of UNEG members. They are intended to guide the establishment of the institutional framework, management of the evaluation function, conduct and use of evaluations. The Standards are also a reference for the competencies of evaluation practitioners and work ethics, and are intended to be applied as appropriate within each organization. UNEG will periodically update, elaborate and expand the coverage of these standards in the service of the UN system organizations.

The TCPS 2 Tutorial Course on Research Ethics (CORE)

2010-04-19T01:06:15

CORE provides an applied approach to the guidance provided in TCPS 2. This self-paced course is a media-rich learning experience that features interactive exercises and multi-disciplinary examples. CORE consists of eight modules ranging from Core Principles to REB Review. It is designed primarily for the use of researchers and REB members – though anyone may take this course and print their own certificate of completion.

Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS2)

2010-04-19T01:00:35

The Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (TCPS or the Policy) is a joint policy of Canada’s three federal research agencies – the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC), or “the Agencies.” This Policy expresses the Agencies’ continuing commitment to the people of Canada to promote the ethical conduct of research involving humans. It has been informed, in part, by leading international ethics norms, all of which may help, in some measure, to guide Canadian researchers, in Canada and abroad, in the conduct of research involving humans. This edition represents the first substantive change to the Policy since its adoption in 1998. It is a major revision, reflecting over a decade of experience in the application of the Policy by the research community to existing and emerging ethical issues and new areas of research. It also distils the experience of the Interagency Advisory Panel on Research Ethics (PRE or the Panel), which was created in 2001 primarily to steward the evolution and interpretation of this Policy, and to provide the Agencies with independent advice on issues related to the ethics of research involving humans. This edition, which replaces the original TCPS, draws on the advice provided to the Panel by its working groups and committees. As well, it reflects the significant and valuable input from the research community and all those who provided feedback on the drafts that the Panel circulated publicly in December 2008 and December 2009.