Journal article icon

Journal article

Reasonable disagreement and the justification of pre-emptive ethics governance in social research: a response to Hammersley

Abstract:
In this response, we first tackle what we take to be the core disagreement between ourselves and Hammersley, namely the justification for our model of social research ethics governance. We then consider what follows from our defence of governance for ethics review and show how these claims attend to the specific concerns outlined by Hammersley.
Publication status:
Published
Peer review status:
Peer reviewed
Version:
Accepted Manuscript

Actions


Access Document


Files:
Publisher copy:
10.1136/medethics-2018-104975

Authors


More by this author
Institution:
University of Oxford
Division:
Medical Sciences Division
Department:
Nuffield Department of Population Health
Role:
Author
ORCID:
0000-0002-7191-901X
More by this author
Institution:
University of Oxford
Division:
Medical Sciences Division
Department:
Nuffield Dept of Population Health
Subgroup:
Population Health
Role:
Author
ORCID:
0000-0002-5603-6200
Publisher:
BMJ Publishing Publisher's website
Journal:
Journal of Medical Ethics Journal website
Volume:
44
Issue:
10
Pages:
719-720
Publication date:
2018-06-26
Acceptance date:
2018-05-31
DOI:
EISSN:
1473-4257
ISSN:
0306-6800
Pubs id:
pubs:859958
URN:
uri:81cecdda-b9c0-4ca0-af0c-584603a8380b
UUID:
uuid:81cecdda-b9c0-4ca0-af0c-584603a8380b
Local pid:
pubs:859958
Language:
English
Keywords:

Terms of use


Metrics



If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record

TO TOP