Access AHRECS Subscribers' Knowledge Base with Ease
Consent: Who are they written for? – A Human Research Ethics discussion activity
When you look at consent templates who were they written for? Can you think of five justifiable alternatives to info sheets+consent forms?
Public need and private pardon – A Research Integrity discussion activity
When confronted with a public need (such a helping with the response to COVID-19 or foiling a domestic terrorist plot) what should do if part of the response is facing punishment for misconduct? A topical research integrity discussion activity that references a block-buster movie.
Consent and partially completed surveys – A human research ethics resource
When an individual only partially completes a survey, what’s good practice? If you answered quickly you are probably failing to meet your responsibilities.
Is a renewal of the ethics approval required? – A Human Research Ethics resource
When researchers interact with research ethics review bodies with regard to matters such as extensions or other variations, a common question is “does this require a renewal application to be considered by the original review body? This checklist provides a standardised approach to answering that question.
Who passes along the message? – A Human Research Ethics discussion activity
This human research ethics activity sheet is based on another fun image by Don Mayne. Like much of Don’s work, while we are chuckling we find ourselves reflecting on an important topic (or, as in this case, topics). How is important and potentially sensitive information relayed to participants? How does an institution usefully inform the practice of researchers after research ethics review?
The National Statement – NMRECRS#06
This sixth resource sheet for new members relates to the National Statement – a brief history, reading and use.
At the first meeting – NMRECRS#05
The fifth NMRECRS discusses useful approaches to your first meeting.
Archived Posts
When words matter – A Human Research Ethics commentary
Consent has a long history in human research ethics, fuelled by some egregious failures to seek and respect the wishes of participants. And to be genuinely informed, that consent must always be fully informed. Right? But what about the nocebo effect?