Suppr超能文献

人类学家与蜡笔:将我们的关注点从避免伤害转向行善。

The Anthropologist and the Crayons: Changing our Focus from Avoiding Harm to Doing Good.

作者信息

Childress Herb

机构信息

Boston Architectural College.

出版信息

J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2006 Jun;1(2):79-88. doi: 10.1525/jer.2006.1.2.79.

Abstract

THE ETHICAL REVIEW PROCESS is aimed at protecting research participants, evaluating risk in relation to benefit, and, where possible, reducing risk to research participants (and by extension, to the sponsoring organizations). In practice, however, there is usually much focus on risk and little on benefit. However, social research presents an opportunity to give active benefits to many constituents: the research participants, the host community, the researcher and research team members, the sponsoring institution and funding agency, the academic community, and society at large. Even when benefits are considered, the proximal benefits-those that actually accrue during (and because of) the investigator's presence-are too often overlooked by both investigators and ethics committees in favor of the more distal benefits related to the contribution to knowledge. The research design and review processes can both be redirected to focus more centrally on imagining, creating and extending the benefits of our work.

摘要

伦理审查过程旨在保护研究参与者,评估风险与收益的关系,并在可能的情况下降低对研究参与者(以及推广至主办组织)的风险。然而,在实践中,通常过多关注风险而很少关注收益。然而,社会研究为许多群体带来积极收益提供了机会:研究参与者、东道社区、研究人员和研究团队成员、主办机构和资助机构、学术界以及整个社会。即使考虑到收益,调查人员和伦理委员会也常常忽视近端收益——即在调查人员在场期间(并由于其在场)实际产生的收益,而更倾向于与知识贡献相关的远端收益。研究设计和审查过程都可以重新调整方向,更集中地关注想象、创造和扩展我们工作的收益。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验