This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Hedgecoe, A. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Research Ethics Review and the Sociological Research Relationship

University of Sussex, a.m.hedgecoe{at}sussex.ac.uk

For years, sociologists working in other countries or UK-based medical sociologists have complained about the effects of having to seek approval from a research ethics committee (REC) or its equivalent before starting work. With the arrival of the ESRC's Research Ethics Framework, concern about ethics review has expanded to sociologists working on a wider range of topics. This article uses ethnographic data from a study of UK RECs to examine how these bodies assess applications from social scientists, particularly those proposing qualitative research (which opponents claim is given an especially hard time by such committees). These data challenge the idea that RECs are somehow ideologically biased against qualitative research and that they cannot give an adequate assessment of applications from sociologists and other social scientists. The article concludes by suggesting sociologists' time would be better spent studying the institutional nature of the university RECs stimulated by the ESRC.

Key Words: ethnography • governance • national health service • research ethics

Sociology, Vol. 42, No. 5, 873-886 (2008)
DOI: 10.1177/0038038508094567


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				H Davies, F Wells, and M Czarkowski Standards for research ethics committees: purpose, problems and the possibilities of other approaches J. Med. Ethics, June 1, 2009; 35(6): 382 - 383. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]