Procedures for Ethical Review of Student
Projects
Psychology
Department, Malaspina
University College
Submitted 2007/8
Students are encouraged to participate in
conducting original research as part of their education at Malaspina
University-College, subject to certain conditions. We have outlined student
responsibilities as follows:
1.
Application for Ethical Review
- Applications for ethical approval for research projects which
involve people must be reviewed and accepted by the Course Instructor and
one other faculty member who will act as a departmental reviewer.
1.
No proposal may exceed “minimal
risk” to research participants. According to the TRI-council Policy Statement,
“The standard of minimal risk is commonly defined as follows: if potential
subjects can reasonably be expected to regard the probability and 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 then the research can be regarded as within minimal
risk.” (TRI-Council Policy Statement, 1998, p. 1.5).
For further information please visit: http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/english/pdf/TCPS%20October%202005_E.pdf
, (specifically Article 1.4 (C1))
2.
Students who wish to take on
research with vulnerable populations (e.g., elementary or high school students
or prisoners) must abide by Malaspina’s guidelines
for conducting research with human subjects and must obtain permission from the
appropriate body (e.g., school board). Polices and procedures are available on
the Malaspina website.
[http://www.mala.ca/research/committees/crihs/CRIHSdepartmentalreview.asp].
See Article 2.2 of the Tri-Council Policy Statement for Ethical Conduct for
Research Involving Humans at:
[http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/english/pdf/TCPS%20October%202005_E.pdf].
B. Students must provide the Instructor with two copies of their
research proposal (which will be retained on file for one year). One copy will
be given to another faculty member for an independent review. The researcher
will also retain a copy for his/her records. The two page proposal must
include:
1.
the name of the student(s) carrying out the project and the faculty
research supervisor (including phone numbers and email addresses);
2.
the title of the proposed research project
3.
the purpose of the research
4.
the intended research participants
5.
how participants will be recruited and, if applicable, compensated for
their participation
6.
the method(s) used for gathering information (using deception is not
allowed);
7.
the formal training he/she has received (or is receiving) for
conducting ethical research in the social sciences;
8.
when, how, and to what extent the nature, purposes and results of the
research will be explained to participants;
9.
the anticipated risks and benefits for research participants
10. a description of
how informed consent will be obtained;
11. as an attachment,
copies of research instruments which will be used to gather information (e.g.,
questionnaires, test items, sample tasks, interview questions, etc.).
C. Students must provide a one-page consent form with the following
information:
1.
a brief overview of the research goals and objectives
2.
why participants are being asked to participate in the research;
3.
how much of their time will be required;
4.
that the research is voluntary, and the participant may withdraw at any
time without reason or penalty;
5.
a statement which promises anonymity and confidentiality, and that
all data will be encoded for their protection;
6.
how respondent information will be used, who has access to it, how it
will stored, and when it will eventually be destroyed;
7.
a statement of the possible risks and benefits for participating in
the research (e.g., physical, psychological, social, economic, and legal);
8.
contact numbers of student, faculty research supervisor, and the Dean of
Social Sciences.
2.
Process of Ethical Review
Our departmental
review process conforms to “Research Involving Human Subjects” (Policy 31.03)
at Malaspina University-College.
A. Departmental Reviewer(s)
1.
Departmental Reviewers must
have graduate level training in advanced research methods. They may be either
full or part-time employees in Psychology.
B. Scheduling Reviews of Student Research Proposals
Instructors who
require departmental ethical review for student research projects are expected
to notify other departmental members early in the semester about the probable
workload involved. Every effort will be made to coordinate the process so that
students receive timely feedback.
C. Instructor Responsibilities
1.
The Instructor supervising
original research by students will assess student research proposals.
2.
Projects which require
additional work will be negotiated between the Instructor and student.
3.
The Departmental Reviewer will
assess proposals forwarded by the Instructor.
4.
Revisions recommended by the
departmental reviewer are the responsibility of the course instructor.
5.
The Chair of Psychology will
help resolve any differences between assessments done by the Instructor and the
Departmental Reviewer. If it is not resolved at this level, qualified faculty
from another Social Sciences Department (e.g., Sociology or Criminology) may be
asked for a resolution.
6.
Any data from research
participants and held by the Instructor will be destroyed after one year of the
course in which the raw data was received.
3.
Ethical Review for Course
Assignments
From time to
time, faculty may have students do research which does not exceed “minimal
risk” (see above). Rather than have all students submit
individual proposals for ethical review, this streamlined process will be
followed:
1.
Students in the course will be
educated about their responsibilities regarding ethical research;
2.
Faculty will prepare a template
for the project/assignment, including consent forms where necessary;
3.
The template will be reviewed
by Psychology faculty;
4.
Each semester, faculty will
notify the Chair of their intention to use the same (approved) research
exercise(s).