Please inform the writer to:
- Read the instructions at the beginning of the ethic response form before answering the questions.
- Answer the question number: 20 in the column:Researcher�s ethics self-check
- Answer all 35 the question in the column:Researcher�s response to Ethics Reviewer.
ETHICS RESPONSEFORM
Researcher name (student): Mona Arafa Faculty reviewer: Manh Hao Quach Date of Review:16 th FEB
2017
Working Title of Proposal or summary of study scope:Impact of training and development on performanceImpact of training and
development on performance
Proposal attached?_ Yes No Academic Honesty Declaration signed?___Yes No
Each of the ethical standards below must be adequately addressed by the researcher in order to obtain ethics approval.
In the blue column, the RESEARCHER (student) should perform a self-check using these 35 questions before submitting the ethics
form to the faculty member supervising the study. In each row of the blue column, the RESEARCHER should enter YES, NO, or NA
as well as a very brief explanation. The Academic Honesty Declaration must be attached and should be signed and dated.
In the yellow columnthe ETHICS REVIEWER (supervising faculty member) will enter YES, NO, or NA to confirm or challenge the
RESEARCHER’S self-check on each standard. With each NO, the ETHICS REVIEWER will indicate what revisions are required for
ethics approval. The faculty reviewer will also render a decision at the end of this form and return the form to the RESEARCHER.
If the ETHICS REVIEWER (supervising faculty member) is able to approve “as is” then the orange column is left blank.
In the orange column, the RESEARCHER (student) will respond to each of the ETHICS REVIEWER’S concerns to explain
where/how each of the reviewer’s concerns was met in the resubmitted materials.
Researcher’s ethics self-
check
In each row, the researcher
should confirm compliance with
the ethical standard by entering
“Yes,”“No,” or “N/A,”along with
a brief defense of the response
(i.e., stating keywords that point
to how the ethical standard has
been met).
Ethics Reviewer’s assessment:
After the researcher has presented
the evidence for compliance with each
ethical standard, the Ethics Reviewer
should either confirm by entering
“Yes” or challenge with “No.” With
each “No,” the reviewer must specify
what revisions are neededto obtain
ethics approval.
Researcher’s
response to Ethics
Reviewer
Researcher must use
this column to explain
how and where each
of the Ethics
Reviewer’s concerns
(in the yellow column)
has been addressed.
Example: Will data be stored
securely?
Yes. Data files will be kept on
a password protected
computer.
No. Please also address how the
paper surveys will be secured prior
to being entered as electronic files.
Paper surveys will
be in a locked file
cabinet. Proposal
has been updated.
The first 11 questions apply to all studies (even when the researcher is not interacting with participants to collect new data).
Hover the mouse over the blue footnoted words to view extra tips and definitions.
- Are participant recruitment and
data collection steps 1 adequately
described, such that the study’s risks
and burdens can be discerned?
Yes. The proposal has defined
how data will collected using
interviews and questionanres.
Yes
- Will the research procedures
ensure privacy 2 during data
collection?
Yes. Respondents will not be
required to reveal details like
their actual names.
Yes
- Will data be stored securely 3 with
adequate provisions to maintain the
confidentiality of the data?
Yes. Data will encrypted and
stored secured from exposure
using Kaspersky antivirus.
Yes
- Will the data be stored for at least
5 years?
No. the data will be discarded
after the reasrch conclusions.
No – Explained Since the data contains
confidential
information, sponsors to
the research may require
short periods of
retention of the data.
- If participants’ names or contact
info will be recorded in the research
records, are they absolutely
necessary 4 ?
No. that is why the researchers
will not ask for this type of
information.
No – Explained In order to observe
ethical conduct in
research, the research
intends to observe
confidentiality of
participants through
anonymity.
- Do the research procedures and
analysis/write-up plans include all
possible measures to ensure that
participant identities are not directly
or indirectly 5 disclosed? For
secondary data analyses, the
proposal must clearly state when/how
de-identification will occur.
No. The research will ensure
respondents identity are not
disclosed but not with a write
up.
No – Explained The research will ensure
that the ethical duty of
maintaining
confidentiality of
participants is observed.
Hence, for analysis of
secondary data,
anonymization will be
used in preventing de-
identification.
- Have all potential psychological 6
,relationship 7 , legal 8 ,
economic/professional 9 , physical 10 ,
and other risks been fully
acknowledged 11 and described?
No. The breaserch has only
described legal, economic
risks.
No – Explained The research has only
described economic and
legal risks because
participants will be
debriefed before
participating in the
research. Hence, there
would be no
psychological,
relationship or physical
risk involved.
- Have the above risks been
minimized 12 as much as possible?
Please answer this question Through debriefing of
participants all the risks
have been entirely
minimized.
- Has the researcher proactively
managed any potential conflicts of
interest 13 ? Note that student
researchers may not utilise research
No. the research will not utilize
assistant to recruit participants.
No – Explained The research is not
willing to utilize
assistants in the
recruitment of
assistants to recruit participants or
collect research data on behalf of the
researcher.
participants since
external forces influence
the willingness of
people in enrolling to
participate in research.
- Are the research risks and
burdens 14 reasonable, in
consideration of the new
knowledge 15 that this research
design can offer?
Yes. The knwledge expected to
be gained can have huge
economic and social benefits.
Yes
- Is the research site willing to
provide an Authorisation Letter (or
email) granting permission 16 for all
relevant data 17 access, access to
participants, facility use, and/or use
of personnel time for research
purposes?
Yes. The research will get legal
authorization from Qatar
authority.
Yes
The remaining questions only apply to studies that involve recruiting participants to collect new data (such as surveys,
interviews, observations).
____Please place an X on this line if NONE of the questions in the next section are applicable to the proposed study.
- Applicable for student
researchers: Will this researcher be
appropriately qualified 18 and
supervised 19 in all data collection
procedures?
Yes. The researcher will be
under supervisison from the
learning institution invilveed in
the study.
Yes
- Is participant recruitment
coordinated in a manner that is non-
coercive 20 ? Coercive elements
include: leveraging an existing
relationship to “encourage”
participation, recruiting in a group 21
setting, extravagant compensation,
recruiting individuals in a context of
their treatment or evaluation 22 , etc. A
researcher must disclose here
whether/how the researcher may
already be known to the participants
Yes. The participants will be
redruited in a sound and ethical
manner that dioes not include
coercion. Tominmimize
coerced study, the researcher
will avoid unnecessary
compensation and persuasive
recruitment.
Yes
and explain how perceptions of
coerced research participation will be
minimized 23 .
- If anyone would be excluded from
participating, is their exclusion
justified? Is their exclusion handled
respectfully and without stigma 24 ?
Yes. The exclusion criteria will
include senior managers, non-
employees, andemplyees who
have worked for less than one
year.
Yes
- Where the researcher proposes
to use an interpreter, has adequate
consideration been given to the
interpreter’s training regarding
confidentiality and principles of
informed consent, etc.?
Yes. The study study will use
trained interpreter who
understands the culture of the
respondents, and has mastered
the art of communication.
Yes
- Do the informed consent 25
procedures provide adequate time to
review the study information and ask
questions before giving consent?
Yes. Respondents will be given
as much time as they want to
understand the questions.
Clarifications will be given
when need arises.
Yes
- Will informed consent be
appropriately 26 documented?
Yes. Respondents will sign an
agreement before taking part in
thestudy.
Yes
- Is the participant information
sheet (PIS) written using language
that will be understandable 27 to the
potential participants?
Yes. The information will be
encoded using simple language
that takes care of the
respondents language skills.
Yes
- Does the PIS include an
understandable 28 explanation of the
research purpose?
Yes. The PIS will be presented
such that the respondent
understand the purpose and
objectives of the research
clearly.
Yes
- Does the PIS explainthe sample’s
inclusion criteria in such a way 29 that
the participants can understand
how/why THEY are being asked to
participate?
X YES. The PIS will be written in
simple language with guides being
given for answering the questions.
Hence, making prospective
participants understand that their
participation is voluntary.
X
- Does the PIS clearly state that
participation is voluntary?
Yes. Respondents will
ndertsand that taking part in the
study is voluntary.
Yes
- Does the PIS convey that the
participant has the right 30 to decline
or discontinue participation at any
time?
No. The researcher finds no
need of presenting this
information to the respondents.
No – Explained The researcher has
illustrated in the PIS that
participants will be
involved in the research
voluntarily, furthermore,
the PIS is written in
simple language with
guidelines being given
for answering questions.
Thus participants will
automatically
understand that they can
discontinue participation
or even decline
participation.
- Does the PIS include an
understandable description of the
data collection procedures?
Yes. The PIS entails a well
formulatedexplanation of data
collection procedures.
Yes
- Does the PIS include an estimate
of the time commitment 31 for
participation?
No. Its difficult to predict the
time respondents will take to
answer all the questions.
No – Explained The research may
involve repeated
measures of collection
of data hence it is
difficult to generalize
the time all participants
will take in answering
questions.
- Does the PIS describe any thank
you gifts, compensation, or
reimbursement to participants (for
travel costs, etc.) or lack thereof?
No. The research is vlunatary
and therefore no gifts. Only a
word of thank you will be used
after data collection.
No – Explained Since the PIS is written
in simple language with
guidelines being given
for answering questions,
then before getting
involved in the research
participants will
understand that their
involvement is
voluntary hence they
will not expect any form
of compensation.
- Does the PIS include a
description of reasonably foreseeable
risks 32 or discomforts?
No. The researcher finds no
foreseeable risk.
No – Explained Since the researcher has
debriefed participants,
then the possibility of
occurrence of risks is
unforeseeable.
- Does the PIS include a
description of anticipated benefits to
participants 33 and/or others?
No. There are no immediate
and direct benefits to the
participants.
No – Explained Based on the view that
participants understand
that they are voluntarily
involved in the research,
there are no anticipated
benefits for the
participants.
- Does the PIS explain how the
participant can contact the
researcher and the university’s
Research Participant Advocate?
(USA number 001-612-312-1210 or
email address
liverpoolethics@ohecampus.com )
Yes. The researchers’s contact
information will be presented
after dtata collection.
Yes
- Does the PIS describe how
privacy will be maintained 34 ?
Yes. The PIS will guarantee
that the information collected
will be treated with utmost
confidentiality.
Yes
- Does the PIS disclose all
potential conflicts of interest
(specifying that this study is separate
from the researcher’s other
professional role)?
No. The stuidy has not
predicted any potential conflict.
No – Explained Since all participants
will be debriefed before
getting involved in the
research then there
would be no chance for
occurrence of conflict.
- Do the consent documents Yes. The participants have Yes
preserve the participant’s legal 35
rights?
the right to refuse taking part
in the study.
The remaining questions regarding sensitive content and vulnerable populations should be reviewed and addressed by the
researcher (student) and faculty reviewer, but must also be confirmed by the International Online Research Ethics Committee
before the study may go ahead.
____Please place an X on this line if NONE of the questions in the next section are applicable to the proposed study.
- If vulnerable 36 individuals will be
specifically sought out as
participants, is such targeted
recruitment justified 37 by a research
design that will specifically benefit
that vulnerable group at large?
No. the styudy will exclude
vulnerable participants.
No – Explained In the process of
recruiting participants,
one of the points to
focus on is the
recruitment of non
vulnerable participants
in order to increase on
the efficiency of the
research.
- If the researcher happens to also
serve in a trusted or authoritative 38
role to the participant (e.g., health
care provider, teacher etc.), do the
recruitment procedures ensure
voluntary participation?
No. there wil be no recruitment
procedures.
No – Explained Since the recruitment
exercise will not utilize
assistants then no
recruitment procedures
will be required.
- If the research procedures might
reveal or create an acute
psychological state that necessitates
referral, are there suitable
procedures in place to manage this?
No. the research will be limited
to the goals and objectives of
the study.
No – Explained Due to the debriefing of
participants, the
possibility of occurrence
of the state of acute
psychology is erased,
hence ensuring that the
research only focuses on
goals of the study, along
with its objectives.
- If the research procedures might
reveal criminal activity, child/elder
abuse, or employer policy non-
compliance that necessitates 39
reporting, are there suitable
procedures in place for managing
No. however the researchers
will infrom the law incase of
criminal activity revelation.
No – Explained Since the research
intends to maintain
anonymity of
participants then levels
of confidentiality are not
mentioned in the PIS.
this? Are limits to confidentiality (i.e.,
duty to report) appropriately
mentioned in the Participant
Information Sheet?
However, in case that
there is a revelation of
any criminal activity
from the research, then
the researcher is
mandated to inform the
law authorities.
ETHICS APPROVAL DECISION
THIS DOCUMENT MUST BE POSTED IN THE GRADEBOOK AFTER THE SUPERVISING FACULTY MEMBER HAS RENDERED A
DECISION. THE APPROPRIATE ETHICS PATHWAY(S) MUST ALSO BE ENTERED INTO THE MiTSA , eg LOCAL, EXPEDITED OR
IOREC APPROVAL(S)
The supervising Faculty Member will mark an X next to box A, B, or C. If box A or B is marked, then the supervising faculty
member will also mark an X next to the applicable subcategory (1, 2, 3, etc.):
A. APPROVED VIA EXPEDITED (LIGHT TOUCH) ETHICS REVIEW:
As the supervising faculty member, I confirm that all applicable criteria 1-35 above are met with either a
“Yes” or “N/A.”
I understand my responsibilities as supervisor, and will ensure to the best of my abilities that the
student investigator abides by the University’s policy on Research Ethics at all times.
I affirm that the research activities fall entirely within the parameters of the design indicated with an X
below (1,2 or 3) that the International Online Research Ethics Committee has authorized faculty
members to approve via the expedited (light touch) review:
- analysis of publicdocuments, artifacts, behaviour or data;
- secondary analysis of existing data that is privately held but released for research purposes (with all identifiers
removed); - surveys or interviews ofnon-vulnerable adults on non-sensitive topics (i.e., no potential to participants of
coercion, distress, loss of work/school time, damage to professional reputation). Vulnerable populations include
children, clinic patients, prisoners, military personnel, facility residents, anyone over whom the researcher holds
authority (e.g., students, subordinates), anyone who might feel undue pressure to participate in the study, and any
individuals with severe enough mental disabilities to interfere with capacity to consent to the study.
B. REFERRED TO ETHICS COMMITTEE:
As the supervising faculty member, I am referring this study to the full ethics committee (IOREC)
because [mark 1, 2, 3, 4 or Other below].
I will email the student’s ethics application and all attachments as a single zip file to the ethics
committee via liverpoolethics@ohecampus.com , copying the DOS (or Programme Director where this
exists).
The ethics committee accepts applications until 5 pm Liverpool timezone on the 3 rd Thursday of every month.
Decisions and feedback will be emailed to the student and DA within 5 business days after the 4 th Thursday of the
month. - the researcher proposes to collect data from vulnerable individuals such as children, clinic patients, prisoners,
military personnel, facility residents, anyone over whom the researcher holds authority (e.g., students,
subordinates), anyone who might feel undue pressure to participate in the study, and any individuals with severe
enough mental disabilities to interfere with capacity to consent to the study. - some (potential) participants may find the research topic or premise sensitive
- participants’ jobs or livelihoods may be placed at any risk by the study activities
- the participants’ culture and/or international location suggest that extra participant protections may be necessary
Other: _
c. C. REVISIONS REQUIRED:
The student needs to revise the proposal and ethics materials to address the concerns in the yellow column
and resubmit to me before I can select A or B above.
Footnotes
1 In order to weigh potential risks against benefits, the researcher first needs to plan and clearly articulate all of the following that apply:
how existing data or contact information of potential participants will be obtained,
format and context of the initial contact with potential participants,
informed consent procedures,
assignment to groups (if applicable),
description of any pilot activities,
data collection steps,
transcript review and/or membercheck (if applicable), and
how results will be shared with stakeholders.
2 Privacy risks might include unintended breach of confidential information (such as educational or medical records); being observed/overheard by others while meeting researcher or providing data; or
intrusion on the privacy of others who are not involved in the study (e.g. participant’s family).
3 Secure data storage requires password protection on electronic files and locks for physical data.
4 Note that consent forms do not require signatures if the participant can indicate consent by some action such as clicking on a link, returning a completed survey, etc.
5 Participant identities might be “indirectly” and unintentionally disclosed if a researcher’s final research report fails to withold demographic details or site descriptions that might permit a reader to deduce
the identity of a participant. So the researcher needs to think about which demographic descriptors are most important to collect and report, while ensuring that the identity of individual participants is
protected. Also, the name of the site/organization is typically masked in scholarly research though in some cases, the organization can elect to publicize their name along with the research results.
6 Psychological risks include stress greater than what one would experience in daily life (e.g., materials or topics that could be considered sensitive, offensive, threatening, degrading).
7 Relationship risks are present if the recruitment or data collection process are likely to alter the existing dynamics between the researcher and participant (who may be coworkers or have some
professional relationship), among participants (if they know one another), or between the participant and the participant’s friends, coworkers, or family members.
8 Legal risks are present if data collection might result in a participant’s disclosure of violation of laws.
9 Economic/professional risks are present if data collection could result in the participant disclosing violation of workplace policies, disagreement with leadership decisions, poor work performance, or
anything else that could be damaging to theparticipant’s position, professional reputation, promotability, or employability. Risks are acceptable but participants need to be made aware of professional risks
during the consent process so they can make an informed decision.
10Physical risks are not common in social science research but would involve risk of serious physical injury to the participant or the researcher.
11Minimal risks are acceptable but must be identified upfront. Minimal risk is defined as when: “the probability and magnitude of harm or discomfort anticipated in the research are not greater in and of
themselves than those ordinarily encountered in daily life.”
12 The researcher is responsible for planning measures that will provide participants with reasonable protection from privacy loss, distress, psychological harm, economic loss, damage to professional
reputation, and other possible harms.
13 A conflict of interest is caused when the researcher has some sort of dual role in the research context, such as being a teacher, therapist, investor, business-owner, manager, etc. Conflict of interest
must be managed to ensure that the research reveals “truth,” not just the outcome that the researcher might desire to see due to their other role.
14 All research activities place some degree of burden on the participants by asking the participants to share personal information, volunteer time, and assume risks.
15 Examples of “new knowledge” include: effectively addressing a gap in the literature, generating new theory, enhancing understanding of a phenomenon, assessing effectiveness of a particular
professional practice, addressing a local practical problem via data analysis.
16 No documentation of permission is required (a) if the researcher will simply be asking organizations to distribute research invitations on the researcher’s behalf, or (b) if the researcher is using only
public means to identify/contact participants.
17 Note that when medical, educational, or business records would be analyzed or used to identify potential research participants, the site needs to explicitly approve access to data for research purposes
(even if the researcher normally has access to that data to perform his or her job).
18Researchers must be able to document their training in the data collection techniques and the ethics committee might require the researcher to obtain additional training prior to ethics approval. For
most student researchers, the research course sequence is sufficient but some research procedures (such as interviewing people with mental disabilities) may require additional training. For psychological
assessments, the manual indicates specific qualifications required. Data collection from children requires a background check/clearance through a local agency.
19 Remote supervision is suitable for most studies but onsite supervision may be required for certain types of sensitive data collection (e.g., interviews or assessment regarding emotional topics).
20 For example, anonymous surveys and/or low-pressure communications such as email invitations permit potential participants to opt out with minimal fear of retaliation or other negative consequences.
21 It is not ethically acceptable to invite a “captive audience” to participate in research on the spot (i.e., to ask an entire class or a group of meeting attendees to complete a survey during their session).
Such a dynamic would not provide sufficient privacy or respect for their right to decline research participation. However, a researcher may use the last few minutes of a meeting to introduce a study and
distribute materials, such that the potential participants can then take their time to decide later about participation.
22 Generally, data collection cannot be approved during work hours or school hours unless a “free period” has been identified (e.g., lunch) so the research activities can be separated from the participants’
regular activities. It is important to maintain an “opt in” dynamic rather than implying that employees/students/group members are expected to participate.
23Completion of the study directly benefits the student (allowing him or her to obtain a degree), and so the researcher should minimize the potential for either (a) conflict of interest or (b) perceived
coercion to participate. Researchers who are in positions of authority or familiarity must take extra precautions to ensure that potential participants are not pressured to take part in their study. Examples:
an instructor researcher may recruit her students AFTER grades have been assigned; a psychologist researcher may recruit clients from ANOTHER psychologist’s practice; a manager researcher may
conduct ANONYMOUS data collection so that subordinates do not perceive their responses or [non]participation as being associated with their job standing.
24 When applicable, the exclusion criteria should be listed on the recruitment material (flyer, invitation email,etc.) or participant information sheet (PIS) to prevent situations in which the researcher rejects
volunteers in a stigmatizing manner.
25Informed consent is not just a form; it is a process of explaining the study to the participant and encouraging questions before the participant makes a decision about participation.
26 While documenting consent via signature is common, note that anonymous surveys can obtain “implied consent” by informing the participant, “To protect your privacy, no consent signature is
requested. Instead, you may indicate your consent by clicking here/returning this survey in the enclosed envelope.”) It is also acceptable to audiorecord verbal consent for interviews, in order to not have
any record of the interviewee’s name.
27The ethics committee encourages tailoring the language to the readers as long as a professional tone is maintained.
28 Minimal jargon should be used during the informed consent process. Everyday layperson language is most appropriate to help a participant make an informed decision about participation.
29 People receiving the PIS should not be left wondering, “How did the researcher get my name?” or “Why am I being invited and not others?” or “Does the researcher already know private information
about me?” The means by which the researcher has identified and contacted the potential participant needs to be made clear, if it is not already clear from the context. Sample explanations of inclusion
criteria in PIS: (a) The human resources department has forwarded this invitation to all employees who meet the researcher’s study criteria (i.e., have been with the organization at least 2 years and have
transitioned into a managerial role within the past year); or (b) The researcher is inviting all attendees of the past year’s XYZ professional conference to be in the study; or (c) The researcher will be
randomly selecting possible participants by approaching the residents of every 5 th home in this neighborhood until 100 responses are obtained.
30 When the researcher is already known to the participant, the PIS must include written assurance that declining or discontinuing will not negatively impact the participant’s relationship with the
researcher or (if applicable) the invitee’s access to services.
31 Provide an estimate (in minutes or hours) of each component of data collection (e.g., survey, interview, memberchecking. etc. )
32 Describe only the possible harms that go beyond the risks of daily life.
33 For most social science studies, it is appropriate to state that there are no particular direct benefits to the individual. In this case, just present the benefits to society.
34The PIS shouldexplain that the research report will not include names and that the data will not be used for any purposes other than research. It is not always clear to participants how a research
interview is different from a journalistic interview, in which informants might be named.So the PIS should also describe any coding system that will permit the researcher to not use names. For sensitive
interviews, the researcher might also want to assure participants that recordings will be destroyed immediately after transcription.
35The consent forms/process should not ask a participant to waive any legal rights.
36 Vulnerable participants include children, clinic patients, prisoners, military personnel, facility residents, anyone over whom the researcher holds authority (e.g., students, subordinates), anyone who
might feel undue pressure to participate in the study, and any individuals with severe enough mental disabilities to interfere with capacity to consent to the study. Pregnant women (and their unborn
children) are only considered a vulnerable population when a study involves physically risky data collection.
37Targeted recruitment of vulnerable participants can only be approved when the ethics committee determines that the study’s benefits justify its risks/costs.
38 A researcher with a dual role must use anonymous surveys or some other method that permits potential participants to opt out without fear of negative consequences. Patients, students, and
subordinates of the researcher need explicit assurance that their decision about participation will in no way impact
