David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Academic Ethics 2 (4):315-338 (2005)
A review of the literature and ethnographic data from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States, and the United Kingdom on the research ethics review process suggest that moral panics can become triggers for punctuated equilibrium in the review process at both the macro and microlevel, albeit with significantly different levels of magnitude and impact. These data suggest that neither the development of the ethics review process nor the process itself proceeds gradually, but both are characterized by periodic major shifts evoked by particular events or situations that result in varying levels of moral panic. One way to deal with this moral panic is to increase the regulation of research and the depth or intensity of the scrutiny of applications under ethics review. Moral panics at the macrolevel influence those at the microlevel and, if the moral panic evoked at the local or microlevel is not satisfactorily resolved, it will evoke action at a higher level. Understanding the evolution of research ethics review processes from this perspective might help make actions by ethics committees and policy makers more understandable and help explain why attention to research ethics are heightened at particular points in time. It may also provide a basis for developing recommendations for adaptations to the ethics review process and policy at both the local and macrolevel.
|Keywords||Australia Canada New Zealand research ethics review process United Kingdom United States|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
James Wilson & David Hunter (2010). Research Exceptionalism. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (8):45-54.
Similar books and articles
Raymond De Vries, Debra A. DeBruin & Andrew Goodgame (2004). Ethics Review of Social, Behavioral, and Economic Research: Where Should We Go From Here'. Ethics and Behavior 14 (4):351 – 368.
Dominique Rivière (2011). Looking From the Outside/In: Re-Thinking Research Ethics Review. [REVIEW] Journal of Academic Ethics 9 (3):193-204.
Deborah L. Leitsch (2004). Differences in the Perceptions of Moral Intensity in the Moral Decision Process: An Empirical Examination of Accounting Students. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 53 (3):313-323.
Mark A. Seabright (2000). The Development of Moral Imagination. Business Ethics Quarterly 10 (4):845-884.
Eric W. Stein & Norita Ahmad (2009). Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (Ahp) to Construct a Measure of the Magnitude of Consequences Component of Moral Intensity. Journal of Business Ethics 89 (3):391 - 407.
Richard W. Momeyer (2002). What Conception of Moral Truth Works in Bioethics? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 27 (4):403 – 416.
Evert Leeuwen Martine de Vrievans (forthcoming). Reflective Equilibrium and Empirical Data: Third Person Moral Experiences in Empirical Medical Ethics. Bioethics.
Martine de Vries & Evert van Leeuwen (2010). Reflective Equilibrium and Empirical Data: Third Person Moral Experiences in Empirical Medical Ethics. Bioethics 24 (9):490 - 498.
Linda Thorne, Dawn W. Massey & Michel Magnan (2003). Institutional Context and Auditors' Moral Reasoning: A Canada-U.S. Comparison. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 43 (4):305 - 321.
Maureen H. Fitzgerald, Paul A. Phillips & Elisa Yule (2006). The Research Ethics Review Process and Ethics Review Narratives. Ethics and Behavior 16 (4):377 – 395.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #107,347 of 1,679,326 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #183,792 of 1,679,326 )
How can I increase my downloads?