Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Reasoning “Uncharted Territory”

Research

Links

Text available via DOI:

Keywords

View graph of relations

Reasoning “Uncharted Territory”: Notions of Expertise Within Ethics Review Panels Assessing Research Use of Social Media

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

Reasoning “Uncharted Territory”: Notions of Expertise Within Ethics Review Panels Assessing Research Use of Social Media. / Sellers, C.; Samuel, G.; Derrick, G.
In: Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, Vol. 15, No. 1-2, 01.02.2020, p. 28-39.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Sellers, C, Samuel, G & Derrick, G 2020, 'Reasoning “Uncharted Territory”: Notions of Expertise Within Ethics Review Panels Assessing Research Use of Social Media', Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, vol. 15, no. 1-2, pp. 28-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264619837088

APA

Sellers, C., Samuel, G., & Derrick, G. (2020). Reasoning “Uncharted Territory”: Notions of Expertise Within Ethics Review Panels Assessing Research Use of Social Media. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 15(1-2), 28-39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264619837088

Vancouver

Sellers C, Samuel G, Derrick G. Reasoning “Uncharted Territory”: Notions of Expertise Within Ethics Review Panels Assessing Research Use of Social Media. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. 2020 Feb 1;15(1-2):28-39. Epub 2019 Dec 12. doi: 10.1177/1556264619837088

Author

Sellers, C. ; Samuel, G. ; Derrick, G. / Reasoning “Uncharted Territory” : Notions of Expertise Within Ethics Review Panels Assessing Research Use of Social Media. In: Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics. 2020 ; Vol. 15, No. 1-2. pp. 28-39.

Bibtex

@article{c44cad3d66fd4c60a4f4f1fcd6e8559b,
title = "Reasoning “Uncharted Territory”: Notions of Expertise Within Ethics Review Panels Assessing Research Use of Social Media",
abstract = "The fast changing field of social media (SM) research presents unique challenges for research ethics committees (RECs). This article examines notions of experience and expertise in the context of REC members reviewing proposals for SM research and considers the role of the RECs in this area of review. We analyze 19 interviews with REC members to highlight that a lack of personal and professional experience of SM, compounded by a lack of institutional and professional guidelines, mean many REC members feel they do not possess sufficient expertise to review SM research. This view was supported by 14 interviews with SM researchers. REC members drew on strategies to overcome their lack of experience, although most SM researchers still found this problematic, to varying degrees. We recommend several steps to ensure REC expertise in SM research keeps pace of this fast-developing field, taking a pro-active, dialogic approach.",
keywords = "social media, research ethics committee, ethics, experience, expertise",
author = "C. Sellers and G. Samuel and G. Derrick",
year = "2020",
month = feb,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1556264619837088",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "28--39",
journal = "Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics",
issn = "1556-2646",
publisher = "SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC",
number = "1-2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reasoning “Uncharted Territory”

T2 - Notions of Expertise Within Ethics Review Panels Assessing Research Use of Social Media

AU - Sellers, C.

AU - Samuel, G.

AU - Derrick, G.

PY - 2020/2/1

Y1 - 2020/2/1

N2 - The fast changing field of social media (SM) research presents unique challenges for research ethics committees (RECs). This article examines notions of experience and expertise in the context of REC members reviewing proposals for SM research and considers the role of the RECs in this area of review. We analyze 19 interviews with REC members to highlight that a lack of personal and professional experience of SM, compounded by a lack of institutional and professional guidelines, mean many REC members feel they do not possess sufficient expertise to review SM research. This view was supported by 14 interviews with SM researchers. REC members drew on strategies to overcome their lack of experience, although most SM researchers still found this problematic, to varying degrees. We recommend several steps to ensure REC expertise in SM research keeps pace of this fast-developing field, taking a pro-active, dialogic approach.

AB - The fast changing field of social media (SM) research presents unique challenges for research ethics committees (RECs). This article examines notions of experience and expertise in the context of REC members reviewing proposals for SM research and considers the role of the RECs in this area of review. We analyze 19 interviews with REC members to highlight that a lack of personal and professional experience of SM, compounded by a lack of institutional and professional guidelines, mean many REC members feel they do not possess sufficient expertise to review SM research. This view was supported by 14 interviews with SM researchers. REC members drew on strategies to overcome their lack of experience, although most SM researchers still found this problematic, to varying degrees. We recommend several steps to ensure REC expertise in SM research keeps pace of this fast-developing field, taking a pro-active, dialogic approach.

KW - social media

KW - research ethics committee

KW - ethics

KW - experience

KW - expertise

U2 - 10.1177/1556264619837088

DO - 10.1177/1556264619837088

M3 - Journal article

VL - 15

SP - 28

EP - 39

JO - Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

JF - Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics

SN - 1556-2646

IS - 1-2

ER -