tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post7922500951712005132..comments2018-01-03T07:02:32.059-05:00Comments on Institutional Review Blog: Schrag Responds to Responses to SchragZachary M. Schraghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07101709506166167477noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-79740278706789594572012-10-25T04:45:07.588-04:002012-10-25T04:45:07.588-04:00Pointing at Cardiff regs. is a red herring, not le...Pointing at Cardiff regs. is a red herring, not least of all since I was not here when they were drawn up.<br /><br />The sociologically interesting question is not "why does Cardiff has this in its REC regs" but rather "Why is this a common feature in a large number of UK Universities, and what processes have driven it." The answer (I'm working on a paper with Robert Dingwell on this at the moment)centres on the rise of 'new managerialism' in the UK HE sector in the past 20 years, and other broader institutional factors. <br /><br />For me, the interesting question is structural rather than about individual organisations.<br /><br />My own view on institutional protection is that it has NO place in the proper functioning of a body set up to protect human subjects. I accept that universities will act to restrict research on 'problematic' (i.e. embarrassing) research but they should be forced to do this openly - i.e. through management routes - thereby opening themselves up to clear criticism, rather than sneaking it in through RECs.<br />Adam Hedgecoenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-89451088337283872252012-10-24T23:24:48.743-04:002012-10-24T23:24:48.743-04:00Thanks for this comment.
I agree that this would...Thanks for this comment. <br /><br />I agree that this would be an interesting area of research. Perhaps it could begin at your own Cardiff University, which, like Bristol, <a href="http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/racdv/ethics/urec/URECProcedures.doc" rel="nofollow"> instructs its REC</a> to protect "the reputation of the University as a centre for properly conducted and high-quality research." Who came up with these instructions?<br /><br />Institutional protection has its place. Scholars do represent not only themselves but also their profession and their institution when they go out into the world. But a concern for a university's reputation can fade into a disregard for academic freedom, as in the appalling essay by Jonathan Moss that you so aptly quoted in your published comments on my piece. I would therefore prefer to see Cardiff and other universities instruct their ethics boards to protect their universities' reputations as centers "for properly conducted and high-quality research and as bastions of academic freedom."Zachary M. Schraghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07101709506166167477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-79812103391417009302012-10-24T07:12:57.037-04:002012-10-24T07:12:57.037-04:00While the UK UREC sector is under-researched (not ...While the UK UREC sector is under-researched (not least of all because of isomorphic 'all UK RECs, UREC or NHS, are the same' thinking) there is some data out there suggesting that yes, these committees do base some decisions on 'institutional protection' ground. I made this point at the end of my 2008 _Sociology_ paper when I suggested that “it has largely escaped the notice of those commenting on the rise of ethics review in UK social science that British university RECs _are_ institutionally located, and there is already some preliminary anecdotal evidence that such committees are prepared to act against researchers investigating potentially controversial topics..."<br /><br />I'm not convinced that this means that UK URECs are isomorphic with US university IRBs in all other characteristics, since for me that's an empirical question (rather than an assumed item of faith).<br />Adam Hedgecoenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-10515753724619168912012-10-23T22:14:55.659-04:002012-10-23T22:14:55.659-04:00Thanks for this comment.
I fear I was thrown off ...Thanks for this comment.<br /><br />I fear I was thrown off by the conditional phrasing of that sentence in your essay. <br /><br />I gather from your comment that what you really meant is not that "we might expect institutional protection to play a role in these RECs’ decisions," but rather that "institutional protection plays a role in these RECs’ decisions." If so, I appreciate your recognition of this transnational isomorphism of university ethics committees.Zachary M. Schraghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07101709506166167477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-83256594929567609862012-10-23T05:13:42.058-04:002012-10-23T05:13:42.058-04:00Zachary, how does this work?:
“Hedgecoe seems to ...Zachary, how does this work?:<br /><br />“Hedgecoe seems to think that ‘institutional protection’ is a mission unique to U.S. IRBs” <br /><br />even tho' I explicitly say: <br /><br />“the University REC system in the UK…does resemble the US IRB system in terms of institutional affiliations, and as a result we might expect institutional protection to play a role in these RECs’ decisions” (p.81). <br /><br />Are you doing your 'misrepresenting other people to support your own position' thing again?<br /><br />a.h.Adam Hedgecoenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-525778292565554519.post-77133180126692050192012-10-10T02:17:06.877-04:002012-10-10T02:17:06.877-04:00Excellent thought-provoking post.Excellent thought-provoking post.PCMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13647097472236933108noreply@blogger.com