Search results

This chapter centers on practices of Review Ethics Board (REBs) as they may impact academic freedom for faculty members acting as participants in research. A case example is provided, which highlights the authors’ experience applying for ethics clearance to conduct a qualitative research study. While the study was classified as minimal risk and received ethics clearance from the researchers’ host institution, additional research ethics applications were required from the higher education settings identified, before being able to recruit participants. In addition to pressing timelines, extra workload and the coordination of different requirements for each institution, not all REBs permitted faculty members the option to reveal their identity and their beliefs on pedagogical practices. This particular experience with the ethics review process elicited questions centering on research ethics committees’ practices in terms of (a) providing opportunities for faculty members, as participants in research, to freely share information about their beliefs and teaching practices as well as (b) infringing on faculty members’ autonomy and rights to intellectually express, share and take ownership of their personal beliefs and pedagogical approaches to teaching in higher education.

I want to read the controversies and scandals surrounding Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) within a critical pedagogical, discourse. Ethics are pedagogies of practice. IRBs are institutional apparatuses that regulate a particular form of ethical conduct, a form that may be no longer workable in a transdisciplinary, global, and postcolonial world. I seek a progressive performative cultural politics that enacts a performance ethics based on feminist, communitarian assumptions. I will attempt to align these assumptions with the call by First and Fourth World scholars for an indigenous research ethic (Smith, 1999; Bishop, 1998; Rains, Archibald, & Deyhle, 2000). This allows me to criticize the dominant biomedical and ethical model that operates in many North American universities today. I conclude with a preliminary outline of an indigenous, feminist, communitarian research ethic. This ethic has two implications. It would replace the current utilitarian ethical model that IRBs utilize. It argues for a two-track, or three-track IRB model within the contemporary university setting.

An existing tension in sociological and criminological research with young people is the need to seek parental consent for research participation, while acknowledging that providing parents with descriptions of the research may put youth in precarious positions. This is particularly true when discussing sensitive topics such as interpersonal violence, gang involvement, and/or LGBTQ identity. One mechanism to maximize research participant protections while still preserving their privacy is to utilize independent youth advocates during the consent and research processes, sometimes by sampling with the assistance of youth-serving community agencies. Although such arrangements can be mutually beneficial for research participants, scholars, and the agencies themselves, concerns about strain on agency staff, ownership of data/results, how to engage in meaningful collaboration, conflicts of interest, funding, and other related issues also exist. This chapter draws from our recent investigation of the social worlds of urban LGBTQ youth to discuss the ethical and practical considerations of utilizing the assistance of youth advocates and community agencies. We also articulate how the case for utilizing youth advocates can be made to university Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) by directly citing the federal guidelines regarding research with minors.

Hypothetical vignettes have been used as a research method in the social sciences for many years and are useful for examining and understanding ethical problems in clinical practice, research, and policy. This chapter provides an overview of the value of vignettes in empirical bioethics research, discusses how to develop and utilize vignettes when considering ethics-related research questions, and reviews strategies for evaluating psychometric properties. We provide examples of vignettes and how they have been used in bioethics research, and examine their relevance to advancing bioethics. The chapter concludes with the general strengths and limitations of hypothetical vignettes and how these should be considered.

This study aims to contribute novel insights into understanding and mitigating the harmful consequences of abusive supervision (AS) by examining the association between AS experiences, revenge, forgiveness, and the moderating role of emotional intelligence (EI). The key argument is that employees' EI can influence the AS experience through affective processes, countering supervisors' abusive behaviors.

A between-person scenario-based experiment was conducted with 366 participants divided into AS and control groups. The study explored the association between AS experience and revenge/forgiveness, mediated by core affect (valence and activation). EI abilities were measured as a moderator. Data analysis examined the relationships and interactions among AS, revenge/forgiveness, EI, and affective experiences.

The study reveals significant findings indicating that AS experiences were positively associated with revenge and negatively associated with forgiveness. The mediation analysis confirmed the role of core affect in these relationships. EI emerged as a moderator, shaping the association between AS experiences and revenge/forgiveness. Importantly, participants with higher EI exhibited lower revenge intentions, demonstrating the potential of EI to mitigate the adverse effects of AS. Unexpectedly, individuals with high EI also expressed fewer forgiveness intentions.

This study provides a comprehensive understanding of how employees can effectively counterbalance the impact of AS through higher levels of strategic EI. Examining core affect as a mediator offers novel insights into coping mechanisms in response to AS experiences and their consequences.

The study acknowledges several limitations, as the scenarios may only partially capture the complexities of real-life AS situations. The focus on a specific context and the sample characteristics limit the generalizability of the findings. Future research should explore diverse organizational contexts and employ longitudinal designs.

The findings have practical implications for organizations as enhancing employees' EI skills through training programs interventions and integrating EI into organizational culture and leadership conduct.

Purpose – In this chapter, we address the ambiguous nature of parental consent requirement decisions for the purpose of conducting minimal risk research of at-risk youth.

Methodology/approach – We evaluate current guidelines, which are used to determine the appropriateness of parental consent waivers, review related literature, and offer a case study to understand some of the resulting dilemmas that arise when seeking approval and researching youth in potentially abusive and neglectful situations.

Findings – We offer the researcher, practitioner, ethics committee, and policy maker new strategies to aid in the determination and application of parental consent waivers for minimal risk research participation among at-risk youth populations.

In an essay titled, “In Harm's Way. AMA Physicians and the Duty to Treat” (Clark, 2005), I argued that a physician's duty to treat, at personal risk, followed not only from the language, history, and precedents of the American Medical Association's Code of Ethics, but that such a duty was sound in morally relevant ways. A key element in the soundness of the argument was that such a duty had contractual features that were inherent in an implicit social covenant.