The Review Process
Give yourself the longest period of preparation you can.
Poorly considered applications usually result in back-and-forth between reviewers and researchers, which slows the process down significantly.
How long do I need to spend on my application?
You must not collect data before the review process is complete and a favourable opinion given
What should I put as my start date?
There is no standardised protocol for risk evaluation.
Is there a standardised protocol or score I should use to do my risk assessment?
Where can I find the forms and guidance materials?
Refer to your disciplinary or professional body's guidance.
Should I use resources from BERA/BPS/BSA et al.?
The checklists determine if review is required and the risk matrix determines the "level" of review.
Research Ethics Review is proportionate to research risk. Higher-risk research has greater levels of scrutiny
How do I know if I need research ethics review?
Be generous with the timelines you give yourself for doing your project. Giving yourself the longest (reasonably) possible timeline avoids the need for undergoing amendments
What should I put as my end date(s)?
All research carries some risk.
Are there any risks associated with my research?
YES! Include any materials that will be used to collect data. These should be as "finished" as possible
Do I need to include my surveys/interview guides in the application
Good applications provided a clear and concise overview and rationale but perhaps more importantly demonstrate that they have fully considered the value of their research having considered, mitigated against and/or justified the risk. They are not afraid to identify and weigh up the potential benefit against risk and potential harm. Weaker applications tend to focus on convincing the panel of their subject matter expertise, hence the big words and complex language. This may reflect a lack of experience and a view that the panel thinks subject matter expertise is the most important element of approval or, in the worst case, an attempt to hide the risk as they lack the knowledge or ability to mitigate against of justify it.
What makes for a good application?
Kass Gibson and/or the Research and Knowledge Exchange Office
Who do I ask if I'm unsure about my project?
Traditionally written consent is considered
standard research practice. However, the Research Ethics Panel understand that many
disciplines and cultures do not accept written consent as appropriate. It is the quality of the
consent process, not the format that is most important.
Do I need a consent form?
Explain why you have assessed the risk the way you have. You can make reference to research design, your experience with this kind of work/population, and other factors have shaped your assessment of your project.
What should I put in sections 6b and 6c
All participant-facing documentation should be included in your application. As participants will see these things they must be as complete (and accurate) as possible
Do I need to include participant information sheets, advertisements, or emails used in the study for recruitment and informed consent?
Don't forget to actually tell us WHAT they study is, don't assume we know about your past research/project so miss out key pieces of information. A good summary goes a million miles whatever you're doing in life... pitch well! AND always be sure to clearly state your research question/hypothesis/aims and objectives as appropriate for your work
How to a write a good rationale?
Submission deadlines are the first Monday of every month. Delegated reviews take place each month. Full reviews are (roughly) every second month.
When do I submit my application?
This section should include a full description of how you will obtain free and informed
consent from participants and how this will be recorded, for example, please explain who will
approach whom, where the approach will take place, and what documents will be provided to
participants.
What should I include in Section 4a?
Low risk in research is where the probability and magnitude of possible harms implied by
participation in the research is no greater than those encountered by participants in the
aspects of their everyday life that relate to the research.
How do I know if my research is low risk?
It is the responsibility of the researcher to ensure that they comply with all relevant policies
and laws related to their research. Never collect data you don't need (e.g., don't collect date-of-birth if an age-bracket would work)
How do I manage personal data?
What is stated in the main paperwork needs to be reflected in supplementary paperwork. Arguably, this is not specifically an ethical matter, but clarity and precision of information for researchers and participants (and the panel!) is important. Where there are significant inconsistencies/errors, I think the need to engage in thorough proofread before resubmission is essential, but it's not our job - I think - to identify all errors.
Should I check my work for consistency and accuracy in writing?
All reviews in the last three years have been returned within 20 working days and nearly 60% returned in less than 10 working days
How long does review take?
Explain the purpose of your research and why you are undertaking it
What is the rationale?
1. Any pre-existing vulnerabilities associated with proposed participant groups;
2. Any pre-existing physiological or health conditions;
3. Any pre-existing cognitive or emotional factors, developmental stage, socio-economic
or legal status, and/or;
4. Any power-differentials between researchers and participants.
How do I evaluate participant vulnerability?