1 / 24

Successfully Navigating the BREB / RISe Human Ethics Online Application Form

Successfully Navigating the BREB / RISe Human Ethics Online Application Form . Deirdre Kelly Workshop, April 20, 2011. Overarching Comments. Remember to apply for a RISe number (can take up to 2 weeks to obtain!)

norton
Download Presentation

Successfully Navigating the BREB / RISe Human Ethics Online Application Form

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Successfully Navigating the BREB / RISe Human Ethics Online Application Form Deirdre Kelly Workshop, April 20, 2011

  2. Overarching Comments • Remember to apply for a RISe number (can take up to 2 weeks to obtain!) • Obtain department letterhead from Roweena for consent & some other official documents • You must answer items with a red asterisk; if need be, put N/A (not applicable) • Assume your audience is intelligent and informed, but not necessarily in your field • Avoid jargon • Define key terms • Spell out acronyms • When in doubt, answer to the best of your ability & do it in multiple fields in the form

  3. More Overarching Comments • Looking at examples is helpful (I will show you some in today’s presentation). • Because, however, each study is specific, you would be wise to request examples from professors on your committee or fellow students doing related work who have recently gotten ethics approval. • It's possible for examples to get out of date, etc.

  4. Section1 – PI & Study Team • 1.1 – Principal Investigator • Use the name of your research supervisor • If you have co-supervisors, confer with them • All things equal, pick the one with most experience • 1.2 - Primary Contact • List yourself if you’re a regular email user • Otherwise, list your research supervisor (the PI) • 1.3 – Co-Investigators • List yourself as graduate student • Optional: List other members of your committee

  5. Section 1- PI & Study Team • 1.7 – Project Title • Be as descriptive & non-evaluative as possible • Avoid clever titles & postmodern slashes • This title will appear on all correspondence and on consent letters to participants • You do not need to use the same title for your final study • 1.8 – Nickname • This is a short version for internal use • If need be, you can be clever

  6. Section 2 – Dates & Funding Info • 2.1.A – Project Period Start Date • Do not list a date that is—or could possibly be—prior to your approval coming through • 2.1.B – Project Period End Date • Consider period of analysis where you might need to check back with participants • Cannot hurt to put a date closer to your graduation • In other words, do not err on the side of optimism • 2.2 – Types of Funds • Not applicable (N/A); students are typically not funded for particular studies (faculty are)

  7. Section 3 • Does not exist!

  8. Section 4 – Study Review Type • 4.4.B – Internal Peer Review • Your proposal undergoes internal review by your supervisory committee; mention this • 4.5 – Minimal Risk • “... magnitude of possible harms implied by participation in the research to be no greater than those encountered by the subject in those aspects of his or her everyday life that relate to the research...” • Example: professionals, experts who are being interviewed for their expertise • Most studies will not qualify as minimal risk

  9. Section 5 – Summary & Recruitment • 5.2 – Inclusion Criteria • Summarize who will be included • If K-12 students, mention age/s, grade/s • 5.3 – Exclusion Criteria • Some examples of responses: • “Nobody will be excluded” (only if true, of course!) • “Participants who do not meet the criteria stated in 5.2” • “Teachers who have not taught media literacy for at least three years will not be included.”

  10. Section 5 – Summary & Recruitment • 5.4 – Method of Recruitment • Consider whether you are in a position of relative power or authority over participants • If so, explain how potential coercion can be mitigated • Third-party recruitment • Arrange for participants to submit consent forms in sealed envelopes at a trustworthy site (e.g., in a school-based study, in the counsellor’s office) • Etc. (will very much depend on nature of your study)

  11. Section 6 – Subject Info & Consent Process • 6.1 – Time Dedicated to Project • “...beyond that needed for normal care” • Pre-engagement protocols will vary & might be considered “normal care” • Exclude time spent negotiating access & focus on actual time you anticipate participants will spend in the interview, filling out questionnaire, etc. • Okay to give a time range • Be sure that the time range listed in field 6.1 matches that given in all supporting documents (e.g., consent letter) • Goal of the question appears to be “truth in advertising”

  12. Section 6 - Subject Info & Consent Process • 6.3 – Risks/Harms of the Proposed Research • Consider your social location/s in relation to participants & the proposed study • Are you recognizing & attending to the power/authority dynamics? • If potentially traumatic experiences might surface, describe nature of counselling resources you will make available

  13. Section 6 - Subject Info & Consent Process • 6.4 – Benefits to Participants • A common possible benefit is the opportunity to reflect on one’s own experiences • Another is to honour or validate the work or knowledge of participants • 6.5 – Reimbursement for Expenses, Payments, Gifts-in-kind • Err on the side of caution in describing reimbursement (e.g., describe providing snacks) • Be aware of how reimbursement might be seen at coercive

  14. Section 6 - Subject Info & Consent Process • 6.6 – Who Will Explain the Consent & Invite Participants to Participate? • 1. Who will approach the participant to obtain consent? • 2. Who will inform & take the consent from the participant? • 3. What is the relationship of the person obtaining consent to the participant? • If doing teacher research in your own classroom, consider having a trusted adult explain the study to students (your own students are seen as a “captive audience”) • 6.7 – How Long to Decide Whether to Participate? • A few days up to one week is typical • Too little time might be coercive; too much time & people forget to get back to you

  15. Section 6 - Subject Info & Consent Process • 6.8 – Competence to Consent • Tick “No” if students under 19 are involved • Strongly consider an assent form for children & youth (use age-appropriate language in the form!) • If youth might be harmed by seeking parental consent, it’s possible to make a case for older youth to consent on their own behalf (e.g., study with queer or questioning youth who may fear asking their parents’ permission; a population where some might be emancipated minors)

  16. Section 7 – Locations of Study • 7.1 – External Approvals • 7.1.A – Other Institutions [not UBC] • Indicate “yes” if the study is conducted at another institution • Note: An institution has official letterhead, a chain of authority, etc. • Note: You are doing research at an institution if you will recruit, observe, or interview people there • This “external approval” is the same thing as the ethics approval from that site

  17. Section 7 – Locations of Study • 7.1- Other relevant information • Letter of conditional approval : the non-UBC institution may require UBC BREB to issue a letter of conditional approval (UBC BREB can do so) • All things equal, make a “concurrent application” to UBC BREB & the other institution where you will conduct your study (e.g., Vancouver School Board and UBC BREB); this is common procedure for big or complex organizations • 7.1.B – Add Name/s of Institution/s • This is where you attach agency approval • If you don’t have approval yet, see 7.1.E or 7.1.F

  18. Section 7 – Locations of Study • 7.1.C & D – Other Jurisdiction or Country • If doing research in a country besides Canada, need to ALSO go through ethics process at an institution where you will be carrying out the study (can take time!) • 7.1.E - Request for Ethics Approval submitted • Following from 7.1.A, 7.1.C, or both, answer “yes” or “no” • 7.1.F – Explanation if “no” to 7.1.E • A common reason is that the institution or country does not have a formal ethics approval process; thus, explain your informal steps to get approval

  19. Section 7 – Locations of Study • 7.1.G – “Does this research involve aboriginal communities or organizations; or aboriginals as an identified subject category?” • Background: colonialism; outsiders “parachuting” in • Need to research the protocol for each Aboriginal community (e.g., chief  band council  band school advisory) • Protocols will differ depending on if you are an “insider” or an “outsider” to the Aboriginal community or organization • Example of “aboriginals as an identified subject category”: “Aboriginal academics at UBC”

  20. Section 7 - Number of Subjects • 7.2.A – How Many Participants Enrolled? • List possible total you will interview, collect work from, observe (e.g., if you will select from a class of 20 and don’t know how many will consent to participate, consider listing up to 20) • 7.3 – Procedures or Methods • The list contains methods that will come under extra scrutiny. Common ones in EDST are: • Action research: potential for coercion when researching own site of practice • Videotaping: need to protect non-participants • Focus groups: researcher cannot guarantee that focus group participants will honour confidentiality • Ethnography: be specific about focus of observation

  21. Section 7 - Number of Subjects • 7.4 – Who Will Conduct Study & Their Qualifications • Mention completion of Tri-Council Tutorial • Mention methodology courses, workshops • Mention work experience that involved doing research (e.g., RA-ship conducting interviews) • Mention any special qualifications relevant to the study (e.g., speaking the language of participants, filmmaking, etc.)

  22. Section 8 - Confidentiality • 8.1 – Security of Data • All things equal, do not keep data & images on the web • Google Docs is not secure & is kept on a foreign server • 8.3 - Protection of Personal Information • Common to assign pseudonyms (fake names) • Possible to get permission to use adult participants’ real names to honour their contributions • In consent letter offering this choice, add a separate signature line, stating: “I agree to use my actual full name in this study”

  23. Section 9 - Documentation • 9.1 – Protocol • Attach your committee-approved research proposal • 9.2 – Consent Forms • Check & re-check adherence to BREB guidelines • Inattention to detail here is #1 cause of not getting approval on the first go-around! • 9.5 – Ads to Recruit [Participants] • This might include a flyer, brochure, Internet message

  24. Section 9 - Documentation • 9.6 – Questionnaire, Interview Scripts, Observation Protocol • You only need to submit sample interview questions (it’s OK if later need to add, cut, edit) • If applicable: Give details about what, who, where, when you will be observing (observation protocol) • 9.7 – Letter of Initial Contact • This would include third-party recruitment letters • 9.8.A – Other Documents • This is where to attach agency approvals from other institutions go (some of these might be already attached in 7.1.B & 7.1.D)

More Related