Suppr超能文献

声誉风险、学术自由与研究伦理审查

Reputational Risk, Academic Freedom and Research Ethics Review.

作者信息

Hedgecoe Adam

机构信息

Cardiff University, UK.

出版信息

Sociology. 2016 Jun;50(3):486-501. doi: 10.1177/0038038515590756. Epub 2015 Jun 25.

Abstract

Drawing on scholarship around academic freedom and new public management, this article explores the way in which research ethics committees in UK universities (URECs) can come to exhibit behaviour - common in their US equivalents - that prioritises the reputational protection of their host institution over and above academic freedom and the protection of research subjects. Drawing on two case studies the article shows both how URECs can serve to restrict research that may be 'embarrassing' for a university and how, in high profile cases, university management come to use such committees as mechanisms for internal discipline.

摘要

本文借鉴了关于学术自由和新公共管理的学术研究成果,探讨了英国大学研究伦理委员会(URECs)如何会表现出——类似于美国同行的常见行为——将保护其主办机构的声誉置于学术自由和研究对象保护之上。通过两个案例研究,本文展示了URECs如何能够限制可能令大学“难堪”的研究,以及在备受瞩目的案例中,大学管理层如何将此类委员会用作内部纪律处分的机制。

相似文献

1
Reputational Risk, Academic Freedom and Research Ethics Review.
Sociology. 2016 Jun;50(3):486-501. doi: 10.1177/0038038515590756. Epub 2015 Jun 25.
3
Evaluation of the work of hospital districts' research ethics committees in Finland.
J Med Ethics. 2014 Dec;40(12):866-8. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2012-101313. Epub 2014 Sep 22.
4
Academic freedom and the obligation to ensure morally responsible scholarship in nursing.
Nurs Inq. 2012 Jun;19(2):107-15. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1800.2011.00553.x. Epub 2011 Jul 12.
5
Human research ethics committees in technical universities.
J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2014 Jul;9(3):67-73. doi: 10.1177/1556264614540596.
6
Protecting vulnerable research participants: a Foucault-inspired analysis of ethics committees.
Nurs Ethics. 2011 Sep;18(5):640-50. doi: 10.1177/0969733011403807. Epub 2011 Jun 6.
7
Institutional review boards and research on individuals with mental disorders.
Account Res. 1996;4(3-4):187-95. doi: 10.1080/08989629608573879.
8
The reform of UK research ethics committees: throwing the baby out with the bath water?
J Med Ethics. 2005 Aug;31(8):487-9. doi: 10.1136/jme.2004.010546.
9
Research ethics in Eastern Europe.
Bull Med Ethics. 1992 Oct;No. 82:13-8.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

1
The UK Freedom of Information Act (2000) in healthcare research: a systematic review.
BMJ Open. 2013 Nov 27;3(11):e002967. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002967.
2
Reading trust between the lines. "Housekeeping work" and inequality in human-subjects review.
Camb Q Healthc Ethics. 2013 Oct;22(4):391-9. doi: 10.1017/S096318011300025X.
5
Rationalising public participation in the health service: the case of research ethics committees.
Health Place. 2004 Dec;10(4):339-48. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2004.08.004.
6
Ethical issues in social research: difficulties encountered gaining access to children in hospital for research.
Child Care Health Dev. 2004 Jul;30(4):377-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2214.2004.00426.x.
7
IRB review as a "cooling out" device.
IRB. 1983 Jul-Aug;5(4):8-10.
8
Shutdown of research at Duke sends a message.
Science. 1999 May 21;284(5418):1246. doi: 10.1126/science.284.5418.1246a.

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