The bureaucracy of a typical ethics review is insane and it neither helps design ethical experiments or set boundaries, it’s just paperwork concerned with font type. there’s more truth to this than we’d like, which is not ok.
Oh yeah sure it’s not the ethics thats actually the problem. I think everybody agrees on the need for a strict ethical framework.
But most of the research institutions that I have been involved with have cared very little about the actual ethical constraints of research (such as data privacy or survey questions that could be triggering) But every single time they will pull you up on the font being too aggressive, whatever that means.
I can’t speak for regions other than my own however.
Unfortunately it’s necessary, or you get people running experiments on children. We just can’t seem to rely on people to do the right thing, or perhaps they lose sight of it. Tunnel vision is real.
The bureaucracy of a typical ethics review is insane and it neither helps design ethical experiments or set boundaries, it’s just paperwork concerned with font type. there’s more truth to this than we’d like, which is not ok.
then it’s not “ethics” holding progress, but “bureaucracy”, or “lack of correct collaboration and processes on review boards”, is it?
Oh yeah sure it’s not the ethics thats actually the problem. I think everybody agrees on the need for a strict ethical framework.
But most of the research institutions that I have been involved with have cared very little about the actual ethical constraints of research (such as data privacy or survey questions that could be triggering) But every single time they will pull you up on the font being too aggressive, whatever that means.
I can’t speak for regions other than my own however.
Unfortunately it’s necessary, or you get people running experiments on children. We just can’t seem to rely on people to do the right thing, or perhaps they lose sight of it. Tunnel vision is real.