J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2009 Jun;4(2):77-9. doi: 10.1525/jer.2009.4.2.77.
This issue examines three kinds of nontraditional research methods that are not always easily described in a standard research protocol: community-based participatory research, action research, and online survey research. In each of these methods, the researcher relates to a community and in a way that differs from the medical model of the researcher-participant relationship. An essential aspect of each of these methods is that the researcher cannot exercise as much control over the research context as in many of the more traditional research paradigms. Each of these articles presents concepts and methods that researchers and ethics committees can use to explore the ethical questions they encounter in relation to these methods, and thus develop for themselves new ethical problem-solving skills. A brief research report by Walkup and Bock describes how the presuppositions that research participants bring to their reading of informed consent statements can cause the standard elements of consent to be confusing and result in misinformation. Here, we examine ways to identify these problems and justify appropriate waiver of certain elements of informed consent.
本期探讨了三种非传统研究方法，这些方法在标准研究方案中并不总是容易描述：基于社区的参与性研究、行动研究和在线调查研究。在这些方法中的每一种中，研究人员与社区的关系以及方式都不同于研究人员与参与者关系的医学模式。这些方法的一个重要方面是，与许多更传统的研究范式相比，研究人员对研究背景的控制程度较低。每篇文章都提出了一些概念和方法，研究人员和伦理委员会可以用这些概念和方法来探讨他们在这些方法中遇到的伦理问题，从而为自己培养新的伦理问题解决能力。瓦尔克普和博克的一篇简短研究报告描述了研究参与者在阅读知情同意声明时所带来的预设如何可能导致同意的标准要素令人困惑并导致错误信息。在这里，我们研究了识别这些问题并证明适当放弃知情同意某些要素的合理性的方法。
