Frequently asked questions about research ethics

General

To find out if you require an ethics approval, complete our decision tree.

I need to change my research method slightly. Does this affect my ethics approval?

Research is a dynamic process and quite often a researcher needs to change their approach in the light of the research progress. As ethics approval is granted only for the project as presented in the application, any alteration to the project needs to be notified to AUTEC for approval. The Chair and the Executive Secretary have delegated authority to deal with minor alterations while more significant alterations will need to be considered at a full meeting of AUTEC.

The procedure for having an amendment approved is quite straightforward. Complete an EA2 Progress Report or Amendment of Application form and submit it to the AUTEC Secretariat along with all relevant documents. We will arrange the approval for you and advise you when it occurs. Please ensure that you attach the amended copies of any documents being provided to participant when the amendment means that these are now different to those for which approval was originally granted. It is a condition of ethics approval that only those documents approved by AUTEC may be given to participants.

You are advised that if your research has been underway for at least a year since approval and no EA2 progress report has been received, then your amendment will not be considered until a progress report is submitted.

Please remember when making alterations to your research process that the principle of informed consent means that you may need to go back and advise participants of your changes and that sometimes you may also need to obtain further consent from them.

I wish to ask some friends to help me with my work. Do I need ethics approval?

Many researchers produce as part of their project a presentation, performance, artwork, or show that involves fellow students, family or friends in a support role, e.g. actors, models, technical assistants etc. Whether or not ethics approval is required depends upon whether or not the people involved are participants in the research. This needs to be determined on a case by case basis after analysing exactly what they are expected to do in the project.

Three useful questions to ask are:

Would you normally expect to pay someone for the role being done?
Are you telling them what to do, when to do it, and how to do it?
Are they research assistants?

If your answer to the first two questions is Yes and your answer to the last question is No, then you probably do not need ethics approval. However, you should ensure that you follow the appropriate professional practice for your discipline and have those assisting you sign model consent and waiver forms, acting agreements, etc.

If their role is that of a research assistant (e.g. helping to collect the data, assisting with the analysis of the data etc.), then your research proposals and any ethics application that is necessary would need to clearly identify them as members of the research team and to detail their expertise and role.

When the involvement of the people contributes part of the data for the research and if the answer to the three questions above is No, then those involved are probably participants and an ethics application is required.

If you are in any doubt, then please contact the Research Ethics Advisor or your AUTEC Faculty Representative for further advice.

My application has being approved subject to conditions. What should I do now?

Most of the applications received by AUTEC are approved subject to certain conditions being met. As the letter you will have received informing you of the decision advises, you may not commence interaction with any potential participants until you have satisfied AUTEC concerning the points that they have raised.

Your response needs to be in writing and the best approach is to provide the AUTEC Secretariat with:

A memo in which you set out your response to each point raised by AUTEC;
Copies of any documentation for participants or schedule that has been amended.
Please do not provide the AUTEC Secretariat with another complete copy of the Application Form unless substantial amendments have been made to it.

If the letter advising you of a decision recommends that you contact someone to discuss issues relating to your application, then it is useful to have that person email the AUTEC Secretariat to confirm that they have spoken with you as requested.

If you disagree with an approach taken by AUTEC or wish to propose a different approach, please feel free to do so, ensuring though that you provide AUTEC with the rationale for this different approach.

Once the AUTEC Secretariat receives your response, they will obtain the necessary delegated approvals and confirm the final approval of your application in writing. You are advised that this may sometimes take up to a week or so to process.

If you have not responded and provided satisfactory evidence that the conditions are met within six months, your application will be closed and you will be required to submit a new application should you wish to proceed with the research.

What assistance is available to help me write my ethics application?

Most Ethics applications require a number of clarifications and minor corrections or amendments to be made before final approval is able to be granted. This extends the amount of time it takes to obtain ethical approval and therefore delays recruiting participants and collecting data for a research project. Many of these conditions will be easily avoided if you take advantage of various avenues of support in writing your application.

The Executive Manager and the Ethics Coordinator provide a range of seminars and workshops as well as one to one consultation that are designed to assist researchers at the beginning of their research planning process.

Once an initial draft of the application has been written then it is recommended that you make an appointment with The Executive Manager and the Ethics Coordinator or the Chair of AUTEC or your AUTEC Faculty Representative to sit down and discuss the application with you. This will enable you to more easily identify likely areas of concern for AUTEC before they consider your application, and may assist in speeding up the approval process. While this formative feedback cannot guarantee that AUTEC will have no concerns with your application, past experience indicates that it usually significantly reduces the quantity and level of any such concerns.

As the agenda closing dates are not negotiable, you will need to arrange your appointment so that you have sufficient time to make any alterations that are needed.

Find all AUTEC contact details

What classification is my device?

Many researchers are designing, developing, testing or evaluating devices that have a medical purpose. Unless the research involves a Class 1 medical device, it is most likely that you will need to seek ethics approval from a Health and Disabilities Ethics Committee.

But how do you know what class your device is? There is an online process to assist you, administered by the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration. It is recommended that you navigate this first before beginning the ethics process.

What is the timeframe for gaining Ethics approval?

As stated in Appendix B, you are advised to allow two months for Ethics Approval when planning timeframes. To complete an application well and ensure that the necessary research design has been completed, you may well need to allow yourself at least three weeks prior to the Agenda closing date. You are strongly advised to submit your application to the Ethics Coordinator at least one working week prior to the Agenda closing date for formative feedback (see the link to the left).

Once AUTEC has considered your application, it takes between five to seven working days for their decision to be finalized. Only then can the correspondence be emailed to the applicant and researcher. Most applications will require further amendment, and you will need to allow at least two weeks to respond to any matters raised and receive full approval. Please note that you cannot commence research until you receive the formal memo of approval. Details of how to respond to conditions are given in another answer in the Frequently Asked Questions section.

When AUTEC has deferred approval for my application, what should I do?

Occasionally, AUTEC will consider that it is unable to give ethical approval for a research project in its current form. In these cases, approval will be deferred and you will be given an opportunity to reconsider your proposed research. AUTEC will usually also provide some guidance about which areas need revision, how this may be effected, and who will be able to assist you. When this happens, you may not commence research as ethical approval has not been granted.

Once you have reconsidered your proposed research, taking into account the suggestions made by AUTEC, you should submit a revised application form along with all relevant documentation to the AUTEC Secretariat. This will need to be considered at the next AUTEC meeting, so you need to have it submitted by the Agenda closing date for the meeting at which you wish it to be presented. You need to ensure that you manage your time accordingly.

AUTEC will have recommended that you consult someone, usually a member of the Committee, about aspects of your revision. Your revision will be significantly expedited if you arrange for that person to provide you with written advice that they have discussed the issues with you and include that with your resubmission.

Where do I get documentation for participants translated?

When English is a second language for some of your participants, it is important for you to ensure that they have sufficient understanding of your research that they are able to give informed consent. This is particularly true of those who have limited understanding of English, and especially written English. You will need to translate your participant documentation into a language in which their written competence is higher, thus ensuring that they are more easily and certainly able to give informed consent. Translations need to be provided to AUTEC before approval will be granted.

There are a number of agencies who specialise in translation services. Links to some of these are provided here:

The New Zealand Society of Translators and Interpreters site has a very good search facility.
A2ZTranslate is handy in Fort Street
Auckland Translations Limited
The Department of Internal Affairs has a list of approved translation agencies.

Where do I submit my Application?

Applicants must ensure that they are using the latest versions of forms or exemplars as given on this website. As many reviews take place under delegated authority, please submit your forms as soon as they are ready. Waiting for an agenda closing date may unnecessarily delay review.

Applications and amendments may be submitted in one of two ways as follows:

* By email: A single .pdf file containing the form and all related documents is to be emailed to ethics@aut.ac.nz. The scanned single .pdf file must have the EA form at the beginning and the other documents in the order stated in the form. The application or amendment must have all the required signatures.

* In printed form: The signed and printed form and all related documents are to be delivered by hand or mailed to the AUTEC Secretariat. The printed copies are to be in greyscale, single sided, and with no staples. (Internal Mail Code D-88, by post to Private Bag 92006, Auckland 1142, by courier to Room WU406, 4th Floor, WU Building, 46 Wakefield Street, Auckland 1010). Alternatively, printed forms may be submitted to the Research Ethics Advisor at one of the drop in sessions.

Who owns research data?

Primary legal responsibility under the Privacy Act (2020) for personal data which staff gather and use as part of the formal records of a research project rests with the University, as the employer and the data custodian. Staff may not remove such data without the University’s permission. Doing so could also compromise the rights of research participants e.g. by causing data to be moved to an environment with inadequate security.

Staff who wish to take non‐anonymised research data with them at the end of their employment must seek permission from their Head of School who should refer to any undertakings with respect to data access, storage and destruction given to participants in exchange for their consent. Particular care needs to be taken when the data contains identifiable sensitive information whose disclosure might cause loss or harm. Staff who are granted permission will be required to sign a confidentiality agreement requiring them to comply with The Privacy Act (2020), AUTEC’s Guidelines and Procedures, and any undertakings made to research participants. A copy of the data and Consent Forms should be retained by the University, unless its appropriate retention period has passed.

Students are required in their research to abide by the Research Code of Conduct, and AUTEC's Guidelines and Procedures, particularly in respect of personal data. The University is responsible for safeguarding personal data which students gather and use in their studies. Students may take personal data gathered by them in their research with them if they transfer to another University, unless the research was conducted as part of an AUT research project in which the student participated, or the agreement with the funder or sponsor of the research specifies otherwise. However, students are reminded that they must continue to meet the requirements of the Privacy Act (2020) and other legal and ethical requirements when using the data.

Cultural and Social Issues

Consultation for researchers

Research procedures should be appropriate to the participants. Consequently, researchers have a responsibility to inform themselves of, and take the steps necessary to respect, the values, practices and beliefs of the cultures and social groups of all participants.

Where a research project targets persons from another cultural, social or language group, consideration must be given to the preferences of the potential participants as far as consultation, language and documentation are concerned. Researchers should also become aware of potential implications or interest that the process and outcomes of the research might have for other cultures or groups.

The purpose of any consultation is to ensure that research practices are appropriate and acceptable. Consultation should begin as early as possible in the project and should continue throughout its duration.

All researchers are encouraged to make themselves familiar with Te Ara Tika: Guidelines for Maori Research Ethics: A framework for researchers and ethics committee members.

Researchers may also find Te Kahui Mangai a directory of Iwi and Maori organisations to be helpful. This may be accessed via the Te Puna Kokiri website.

WHAT IS CONSULTATION

Based on case law, some of the elements of consultation can be summarised as including, but not limited to, all or any of the following:

discussing a proposal not yet finally decided upon;
listening to what others have to say and considering responses;
having sufficient time for genuine effort to be made;
having enough information to enable the person you are consulting with to be adequately informed so they are able to make intelligent and useful responses;
having an open mind and being ready to change or even start afresh although you already may have a working plan in mind;
it is an intermediate situation involving meaningful discussion;
the party obliged to consult holds meetings, provides relevant information and further information on request, and waits until those being consulted have had a say before making a decision;

Consultation is not

merely telling or presenting a final proposal;
Talking about or discussing something with someone in generalised terms;
the same as negotiation, although a result of consultation could be an agreement to negotiate.

What social and cultural sensitivity does AUTEC expect from researchers?

AUTEC expects AUT researchers to exercise a high level of social and cultural sensitivity when designing and implementing research.

Any research project which is directly or indirectly associated with AUT University and which is undertaken by one or more New Zealand citizens and/or by or with a researcher from another country or countries recognised by the New Zealand Government, shall at all times be aware of and abide by all relevant statutes, treaties, regulations and rules of the New Zealand Government and AUT University. This applies especially in relationship to social and cultural sensitivity.

The way knowledge is gained and shared in research is to incorporate the three principles of participation, protection and partnership (which arise from the Treaty of Waitangi). It should be noted that this is not restricted to any comparative studies between ethnic groups.

While at times researchers may not always be able to identify whether definitive cultural or social sensitivity issues may arise, they must be receptive and prepared for any such eventuality.

Research procedures shall be appropriate to all participants.  Researchers have a responsibility to be informed of and take steps necessary to respect the social and cultural sensitivity of all participants.

In the realms of sensitivity it is not acceptable to expose any researcher or participant to unacceptable standards of risk or harm whether they be physical, social, psychological or culturally incongruous or discordant.

When a research project involves persons from another culture or language group, consideration is to be given to the preferences of the potential participants as far as consultation, language and documentation are concerned.  Particular consideration must be given to the translation of documentation if appropriate in particular cases.

The purpose of any consultation is to ensure that research practices are appropriate and acceptable.  Consultation should begin as early as possible in the project and should continue throughout its duration.

When do I need to consider specific participation of Maori or those from specific cultures or social groups?

You will also need to consider specific participation of Maori or those from specific cultures or social groups when they form a significant proportion of the target population and you are undertaking a general population study. You will have to explain how you will ensure a representative sample of the target population e.g. if you are selecting participants from a school, it is anticipated that your application will contain information about student demography and your recruitment processes will need to reflect how you will ensure a representative sample. That is, if the student demography comprises 50% Pakeha, 20% Maori, 15% Asian and 15% Pacifica and you are recruiting 20 participants we would anticipate a representative sample of 10 Pakeha, 4 Maori, 3 Asian and 3 Pacifica. You may choose to select a sample that is not representative of the target population but you will have to provide rationale for this.

Additionally, you will also need to consider participation of Maori or those from specific cultures or social groups if there are obvious Treaty or human rights or equity issues. That is, if the context of the research is relevant to Maori or specific cultures or social groups, it is anticipated by the committee that this information is contained in your application and appropriately discussed and considered e.g. if we look at cardiovascular statistics from the Heart Foundation website, ethnicity is a highly relevant variable as in all age groups, deaths are highest for Maori males, followed by Pacific males. It is anticipated that any application related to cardiovascular disease would outline these statistics and take these into consideration in the design of the study and in the consideration of specific participation of both Maori and Pacific.

At all times it is expected that the context and relevance of the proposed research to Maori or specific cultures or social groups is explored, discussed and appropriately considered and provided for in study design and to ensure an appropriate participant sample.

An associated key ethical issue associated with the specific participation of Maori or specific cultures or social groups is that there needs to have been adequate and appropriate consultation and preferably in the design stage of the research. You are referred to the article on consultation for more information about this.

For further information it is advised that you consult the Health Research Council document Te Ara Tika - Guidelines for Māori Research Ethics: A framework for researchers and ethics committee members as well as their Guidelines for Researchers on Health Research Involving Māori.

You are also able to consult with the Research Ethics Advisor and the Executive Secretary .

Research Practice

Am I able to recruit AUT staff or students for my research

Yes. You are able to recruit AUT staff or students for your research project. There are some ethical issues to consider, especially if you will be lecturing or tutoring any of them. Firstly, go and have a look at the Frequently Asked Question titled "What recruitment processes can I use?". This will give you a general overview of the ethical principles that you need to consider. Some ethical issues relating specifically to recruitment of AUT staff or students are:

Obtaining contact information

Class lists and other enrolment information are not available for research recruitment purposes. Advertisement using class presentations, posters, electronic newsletters, and other means is preferred. Please note that a copy of your advertisement needs to be enclosed with your ethics application.

Use of emails

AUTEC does not approve research that uses spam emails for recruitment. Again, advertisement in electronic newlsetters or on appropriate websites is the preferred option. Quite often however, researchers have a targeted list of email addresses collated from publicly available sources. In these cases, AUTEC allows limited use of unsolicited emails, with follow up emails limited to one or sometimes two mailings.

Distribution of surveys through the University email system

Frequently AUT researchers are undertaking evaluations of teaching and learning or processes and seek to utilise the results in research publications. When surveys are being emailed out to staff or students, then researchers are advised to consult with the University's Privacy Officer and the University Relations communications team to ascertain whether the distribution of their survey is appropriate and also to obtain access permission from them to use the University's lists of contacts in this way. Please note that access permission is not a substitute for ethics approval.

Recruitment of AUT staff or students by an external researcher

Any external researcher who is seeking to recruit AUT staff or students for research needs to apply to the Research Ethics Advisor for access permission. Comprehensive information about this is found in the section of the Research Ethics website titled 'Permission to recruit AUT Staff or Students for research'.

Am I able to use health records for my research?

It depends upon a number of factors.

The Health Information Privacy Code states that identifiable health information can be disclosed to a researcher under certain conditions:

the disclosure of the information is one of the purposes in connection with which the information was obtained (i.e. treatment of the individual), or
the disclosure is for a directly related purpose (i.e. audit for quality of service).

Directly related purposes are purposes closely connected with the purpose for which the information was collected. They are purposes that could reasonably be assumed to be within the expectations of the person from whom the information was collected. This may include, for example, disclosure of information for peer review and quality audit. Disclosure of identifiable data to a student researcher for the purpose of obtaining a qualification is unlikely to be considered a directly related purpose.

The use of identifiable health records for research without the authorization (consent) of the individual concerned should only be undertaken within specific constraints. The reasons for not seeking consent need to be justified to the ethics committee. These reasons may be scientific, practical or ethical. If a justification has been made, the research must also be of sufficient benefit that the harm caused as a result of the violation of privacy is outweighed. Obtaining a qualification is not normally considered by AUTEC to be a benefit which outweighs the violation of privacy.

When an agency is approached by a researcher seeking the disclosure of health information, it first needs to satisfy itself that ethical approval has been obtained (if required) and that the information will not be published in a form that could identify any individual. The agency being asked to disclose information will probably also want to be satisfied as to security safeguards and how any interaction with individuals will be managed. These issues should be anticipated by the researcher and addressed expressly within the ethics application, as well as in the approach to the agency. A researcher should also anticipate any disclosures inherent in a research proposal and address those in the protocol for the ethics committee’s consideration. AUTEC may place conditions on the use or disclosure of the information.

A researcher may use health data which has all identifiers (including NHI) removed, and which cannot be re-linked to individuals. In the application to AUTEC the researcher must include a protocol for the de-identification. It is not normally sufficient for researchers to receive identifiable health information, and to remove identifiers themselves.

Am I able to use patients' contact details to recruit them for research?

Not usually. The Health Information Privacy Code states that identifiable health information (this includes identifiers such as contact details) can be disclosed to a researcher under certain conditions:

the disclosure of the information is one of the purposes in connection with which the information was obtained (i.e. treatment of the individual), or
the disclosure is for a directly related purpose (i.e. audit for quality of service).

I am employed in an organisation. May I use that organisation's contact information or data for my research?

Not usually. Information Privacy Principles 10 and 11 of the Privacy Act (2020) regulate the use and disclosure of personal information. They state that:

“An agency that holds personal information that was obtained in connection with one purpose shall not use (or disclose) the information for any other purpose unless that agency believes, on reasonable grounds…:

(e) that the purpose for which the information is used is directly related to the purpose in connection with which the information was obtained; or

(f) that the information - (i) is used in a form in which the individual concerned is not identified; or (ii) is used for statistical or research purposes and will not be published in a form that could reasonably be expected to identify the individual concerned;”

Directly related purposes are purposes closely connected with the purpose for which the information was collected. They are purposes that could reasonably be assumed to be within the expectations of the person from whom the information was collected. This may include, for example, disclosure of information for peer review and quality audit. Usually it would not include disclosure to a researcher.

A clear distinction needs to be made between your ability as an employee to access information to conduct your employer’s business and your ability to access that information as a researcher. Similarly, disclosure to a student for the purpose of obtaining a qualification is not usually considered to be a directly related purpose.

The use of organisational records for research without the authorization of the individual concerned should only be undertaken within specific constraints. The reasons for not seeking consent need to be justified to the ethics committee. These reasons may be scientific, practical or ethical. If a justification has been made, the research must also be of sufficient benefit that the harm caused as a result of the violation of privacy is outweighed. Obtaining a qualification is not considered by AUTEC normally to be a benefit which outweighs the violation of privacy.

When an agency is approached by a researcher seeking the disclosure of health information, it first needs to satisfy itself that ethical approval has been obtained (if required) and that the information will not be published in a form that could identify any individual. The agency being asked to disclose information will probably also want to be satisfied as to security safeguards and how any interaction with individuals will be managed. These issues should be anticipated by the researcher and addressed expressly within the ethics application, as well as in the approach to the agency. A researcher should also anticipate any disclosures inherent in a research proposal and address those in the protocol for the ethics committee’s consideration. The committee may wish to place conditions on the use or disclosure of the information.

May I ask my doctor or some other health professional to recruit patients for me?

Provided that:

no identifiable health information (including contact details) are disclosed to researchers without the consent of the person whose information it is, and
contacting patients in relation to research opportunities is directly related to the purposes for which the information was collected,

then it is appropriate to ask the health professional to provide advertisements, invitation letters, or Information Sheets to their patients on the researcher’s behalf. These should ask people to contact the researcher directly if they want more information or are interested in taking part.

Alternatively, patients may give permission to health professionals to pass on their contact details to the researcher.

What do I have to do about disseminating information about my findings?

There are two main aspects to disseminating the findings of your research, and information about each is asked for in different parts of the application form.

1. Notifying your participants

Your participants have been kind enough to take part in your research and the least that you can do in exchange is to let them know what the outcome of their efforts and yours have been. When the researcher knows who the participants are, e.g. interviews or focus groups have been used, then AUTEC prefers that the researcher sends a summary of the findings to each participant using the contact details provided on the Consent Form. It is also good practice to ask participants on the Consent Form to indicate whether or not they wish to receive the summary, rather than assuming that all will wish to do so.

When the participants are anonymous, and therefore the researcher does not know who they are, then AUTEC suggests that the researcher advises them in the Information Sheet of a website on which the researcher will post a summary of the findings.

2. Publishing your findings

There are more people than your participants who may be interested in the findings of your research and it is important to think about who they might be and how the findings may best be distributed to them. For many, letting them know that your findings have been published in a particular journal or are in the AUT Library's Scholarly Commons will be sufficient. For other groups or people, it may be better to send a report directly to them and to allow them to distribute it to interested parties,

Commercial Sensitivity

Sometimes research is undertaken under contract and the sponsor has ownership of the results and may insist on embargoing the results for a period of time. AUT has specific processes around how this occurs and in these cases, you need to ensure that these processes have been followed. AUTEC's default position is that whenever possible the findings are to be disseminated.

If you have any doubt or questions about ethical issues in relation to disseminating information about your research findings, please contact either the Research Ethics Advisor or your AUTEC Faculty representative for advice.

What do I need to include in an advertisement for participants?

Ethics and advertising for participants
The key ethical principles involved are

Partnership
Informed and Voluntary Consent
Truthfulness

Any recruitment for people to take part in research should avoid:

bulk unsolicited correspondence;
any form of coercion, undue influence, or inappropriate inducement;
and any hint of harassment.

The wording of advertisements should implement this approach, seeking to engage people in the research in a transparent and honest manner. Direct advertising to potential research participants should be regarded as the start of the informed and voluntary consent process as well as the start of the selection of participants.

Advertisements may occur via newspaper, radio, television, bulletin boards, posters, flyers, electronic newsletters and other digital media (e.g. internet advertising, social media). The popularity of social media and internet advertising is likely to continue to grow, as will the appeal of using it to recruit research participants. The ethical issues around internet and social media recruitment are substantially the same as those surrounding traditional recruitment methods. Social media recruitment must meet the same standards as other types of recruitment. Researchers should be aware that social media may have a higher potential for unduly influencing participants than more traditional recruitment tools such as notices in newspapers.

AUTEC will review the final copy of advertisements (or transcripts of recorded advertisements) to ensure that the wording is appropriate and not misleading.

Preparing the advertisement
The advertisement should be carefully checked to ensure it adequately implements or reflects the following points:

The content and language of the advertisement needs to be appropriate for the sort of people being targeted as potential participants for the research.
The procedure for recruiting people and the wording of the advertisement needs to encourage the voluntary nature of participation in research. References to benefits, harms, or payments should be made simply and factually, avoiding over-statement and over-emphasis. This applies to the formatting as well as the wording.
The nature of research as a process that is exploratory or investigative needs to be clearly indicated by the language used in the advertisement to describe what is happening in the research and to describe possible outcomes and benefits of the research.
Potential participants should receive clear information about what is likely to happen in the research, what sort of people are being sought, what sort of people are not needed, and what they need to do next in order to take part in the research.
Logos, images, font size, text effects and other such information should present the research in a balanced and truthful fashion. Exaggeration and over emphasis may unduly influence potential participants or even be dishonest.
The finalised version of the advertisement showing the formatting that the potential participants will view needs to be provided with the ethics application.
Any compensation or gift being offered should only be mentioned to ensure adequate information takes place and not mentioned when this would unduly influence the potential participants. For young people and for those likely to be from lower socio-economic backgrounds it is nearly always inappropriate to mention compensation as they are particularly vulnerable to financial inducement.
Where significant transport costs may be incurred by participants, it is advisable to indicate whether or not the researchers are able to contribute towards this cost and if so, to what extent.

What is an observation protocol?

An observation protocol is a document that identifies how observation will be conducted as part of research and covers the following points:

How people will be recruited;
How people will be informed about the observation;
How people will consent to the observation;
What will be observed and what data will be collected;
How the data will be collected;
How any deception involved will be managed;
The data collection instrument.

Observation may often be very intrusive on people's privacy and the observation protocol should help the researcher to ensure that their observation is sufficiently focussed so as to minimise this intrusion and to adequately provide the data required to achieve the research's aims.

As each research study is quite focussed and unique, there is no standard template that can be applied across disciplines. It is more important to create a protocol that meets the needs of your study in relation to the above areas of focus.

What is involved in having my research design peer reviewed?

The role of peer review is to provide an assessment of the research adequacy of a study. There are three key aspects to this:

The relative merit of the research
The design and methods
The feasibility of the research

AUTEC’s primary aim when assessing these aspects is to ensure that participants and their time are respected by participating in research that has an achievable aim, uses a methodology appropriate for achieving its aim and which collects data and analyses it in a way that will achieve that aim.

Peer review is an important part of research. For some disciplines it takes place prior to publication. For many others, and for research as part of a postgraduate qualification, it is a requirement before potential participants are contacted. Postgraduate research is peer reviewed through the usual faculty and Graduate Research School processes. In addition, AUTEC provides an exemplar that may be used as evidence of independent peer review. This exemplar seeks to ensure that:

the proposal has been peer reviewed by an experienced researcher in the field of study who is independent of the research and the researchers;
the aims of the research are clearly identified;
the research proposal is well designed and methodologically sound;
the research proposal is supported by an appropriate literature review;
the research procedures are appropriate to the aims of the research;
the proposed study sample is appropriate;
if the research is conducted according to the study design, it is expected to yield useful data within the proposed timeline;
the researcher(s) has (or has access to) the necessary expertise to conduct the research and perform the procedures/techniques required by the research; and
where relevant, all methodological issues have been resolved to the satisfaction of the peer reviewer.

This exemplar is provided to assist those independent peer reviewers who are wanting to provide AUTEC with confirmation of their review. It is optional and alternative exemplars may be downloaded from the Ministry of Health's Health and Disability Ethics Committees website.

For a more complete discussion of the issues around peer review, researchers are advised to read the relevant sections in the National Ethics Advisory Council National Ethical Standards .

What is the difference between Anonymity and Confidentiality?

Refer to the Glossary for detailed information. In brief, within the context of research involving human participants, anonymity refers to the situation where the participant's identity is not known to the researcher, or if it is, when it is not possible for the researcher to identify what information belongs to a specific participant. Confidentiality relates to how the researcher uses the information that has been collected and the ways in which the researcher ensures that others cannot identify the participants.

What recruitment processes can I use

How will you recruit your participants?

There are many methods, including, but by no means limited to, mail outs, emailing, telephoning, advertisement, recruitment through a third party (e.g. employer, doctor), and recruitment carried out by researchers. All of these access contact information through a variety of sources including, but again not limited to, contact details obtained from public documents (e.g. phone book), contact details obtained from private sources (e.g. employee list, membership database), participants from a previous study, snowballing (where participants suggest other potential participants), and personal contacts. What you choose to do depends on the sort of participants you are seeking to recruit, the research methodologies you are employing, and the accepted practices of your academic discipline. These are decisions that you will make in consultation with the applicable research literature, and your supervisor if you are a student or your peers if you are an experienced researcher.

From an ethical perspective, the most important thing is that the recruitment methods are appropriate for the participants you are seeking. Some of the things that will ensure this are:

Adequate voluntariness

The main ways in which recruitment methods may reduce or constrain voluntariness are by offering inappropriate levels of inducement for the people being approached and by having undue levels of coercion.

Inducement may be any form of benefit for the participants that entices or persuades them to participate in a research project in which they would not otherwise have wished to take part.This is different to a benefit that gives participants an incentive to actually do something now that they wished to do anyway.

Coercion is any form of pressure or persuasion, real or perceived, that constrains a participant's ability to say no.

Adequate voluntariness also means that refusal to participate will attract no sanction, and that participants will not be required to give reasons for refusal. It also means that if people agree to participate in the study, they are free to leave the study at any time without being required to give reasons for leaving.

Sufficient information

Your recruitment methods need to be designed to ensure that potential participants have adequate information about the research in order to consent to participating in it. Potential particpants also need adequate time to consider this information and opportunities to ask questions about matters of which they are not sure. They also need to know who to contact with any enquiries that they may have.

It may seem obvious to say it, but sufficient information also means that the information provided is truthful.

Appropriate conflict of interest management

Researchers frequently have other professional or personal relationships with the people whom they are recruiting. When this occurs, researchers need to be very careful that the two roles are kept separate. This is especially important when the other role means that the relationship cannot be one between people who have equal levels of power. A common example of this in a University setting is when lecturers invite their students to participate.

Wherever possible, it is best to invite participants from groups with which the researcher has no direct relationship. When this is not possible, then it is important to ensure that the recruitment and consent processes are managed by someone else who is independent. In these situations, it is also necessary to stress the voluntariness of participation and to make it clear that refusal to participate will not affect the other relationship in any way.

Transparency

When trying to persuade potential participants to take part in research, researchers may be tempted to downplay unpleasant aspects or consequences, overstate the likely importance of the findings, or eclude advice about aspects that may discourage participation. Ethical recruitment avoids these temptations, without dissuading potential participants.People who are undertaking research should not be suprised by what the researcher asks them to do nor by the sort and level of the outcomes of the findings.

Social and cultural appropriateness

We live in a culturally and socially diverse community and when recruiting participants, this needs to be taken into account. There is no effective substitute for consulting with the sorts of people that researchers would like to recruit and finding out what works and doesn't work for them. Researchers need to be aware that cultural differences can mean for example that a recruitment approach that the researcher considers to be normal and straight forward is perceived as coercive or threatening. It is better to have ascertained this before recruitment commences.

Respect for privacy

The main way in which people's privacy and confidentiality needs to be respected when recruiting participants is by respecting privacy legislation and professional relationships when accessing people's contact details. Basically, any contact information that is gained from a source that is in the public domain is able to be used, provided that there are no stated restrictions on their use.(Websites that require logins are not considered to be in the public domain).

When obtaining contact information from a third party or some other source that is not in the public domain, then two key considerations need to be met. Firstly, people need to have agreed to the third party sharing their contact details with researchers when they supplied the information. Secondly, the researcher needs to have the approval of the third party to use their lists of contacts. These restrictions also apply to the use of contact details from earlier studies and to snowballing. Researchers should note that AUT class lists may not be used for research recruitment purposes.

If you have any doubt or questions about ethical issues in relation to recruiting participants, please contact either the Research Ethics Advisor or your AUTEC Faculty representative for advice.

Who owns research data?

Consent Issues

Do I need a Consent Form for an anonymous questionnaire?

It depends on how the anonymous questionnaire relates to the overall research project and how it is being used. If the anonymous questionnaire is the only research instrument involved, or if the participants completing the anonymous questionnaire are not part of any other stage in the research (e.g. interviews, focus groups etc.), then a Consent Form is not normally required. If there is any chance that the identity of the participants completing the anonymous questionnaire needs to or will be known to the researcher, then a separate Consent Form is required.

If an anonymous questionnaire is to be used without a Consent Form, then the following protocol is required:

The Information Sheet (which needs to be separate to the questionnaire) is to include a statement in the section telling people how to participate that says something like 'Completion of the attached questionnaire will be taken as indicating your consent to participate';
At the top of the questionnaire, a statement is to be included that says something like 'By completing this questionnaire you are indicating your consent to participate in this research'.

How do I evidence informed and voluntary consent?

It is a requirement of ethics approval in New Zealand that each person invited to take part in research gives informed and voluntary consent to their participation and that evidence of this consent is obtained. It is important not only to obtain informed and voluntary consent but to obtain evidence of it. This ensures the safety of you as the researcher and of your participants as well as adequate transparency and accountability. Adequate evidence of consent needs to include adequate evidence of identity. It is important that you are able to clearly prove that person A agreed to do x on date d/m/yyyy.

In most contexts, AUTEC requires researchers to provide participants with an Information Sheet that they can keep, and to obtain a signed copy of a written Consent Form .  The researcher needs to keep the Consent Form for at least six years, in case verification is required for some reason. Information Sheets and Consent Forms need to have been approved by AUTEC before they are used.

A written Consent Form is not the only way that a person's consent can be evidenced however. When the only research instrument is an anonymous survey or questionnaire (i.e. when the researcher will be unable to identify who has completed the survey or questionnaire and there are no interviews or anything else involved) then AUTEC considers it sufficient for a statement that says something like 'Completion of this questionnaire (or survey) will be taken as indicating your consent to participate in the research' to be included both in the Information Sheet and at the beginning of the questionnaire or survey.

When an interview, survey or questionnaire is being conducted by telephone, AUTEC usually requires that a written Information Sheet is sent to participants. Depending on on the nature and context of the conversation,  a verbal consent process may be approved.  Any verbal consent however needs to be adequately evidenced, e.g. recorded on audiotape, and to have adequate evidence of identity. This minimises risk for the researcher as well as for the participants. It is important that the consent in these circumstances is fully informed and that it explicitly covers the issues that would be included in a written Consent Form (cf AUTEC's Consent Forms exemplars - see the link to the left). The Oral Consent Protocol in the Consent Form exemplar is a good model to use in these cases.

In some other cultural or social contexts, AUTEC may permit other ways of evidencing consent, providing that it is satisfied that any possible risk to the researcher and participants will be minimal and that there is adequate evidence of identity.  In particular, AUTEC is always concerned to ensure that participants have been adequately informed about what is happening in the research and that they have had reasonable time to consider this information.  AUTEC will not approve alternative means of recording consent if it considers that the informed and voluntary nature of the participants' consent is lessened. In these cases, researchers need to provide AUTEC with justification for using a different form of evidence, e.g. video recording consent, and to provide a consent protocol that outlines how this will occur. This needs to include exactly how the points usually contained in the Consent Form will be communicated to participants and recorded.

When conducting an interview online, it is important to clearly identify how the participants are being invited and what opportunity they will have to consider whether or not to take part. Once they consent, there are three commonly used options for evidencing this:
1. The researcher uses an oral consent protocol, which echoes the statements in the Consent Form, and goes through this before the interview commences. This is recorded, either by video or audio, with its location being noted and then later separated from the interview data for separate storage.
2. They are sent a Consent Form with the Information Sheet which they sign, scan or photograph, and return to the researcher.

3. They copy the content of the Consent Form into an email and send that to the researcher with a sentence indicating their agreement. In this case, it is important that the email is clearly from the participant.

The consent protocol along with the Consent Form or oral consent protocol, needs to be provided to AUTEC along with an Information Sheet that lets participants know that they will be expected to take part in an online interview.

There are also many cultural contexts where some form of collective assent is required. It should be noted here that individual consent is always required and that the cultural requirements for some form of collective assent are always additional to that legal and human rights requirement.

Furthermore, in some cultural or social contexts, written evidence of individual informed and voluntary consent is not appropriate. In these cases, AUTEC will consider alternative ways of evidencing consent, and assent, taking into account the ethical requirements involved, the cultural context, the levels of risk involved, what data is being collected and how this will occur, and the practicalities of the situation. When oral consent is being obtained, some form of recording that, e.g. audiotape or videotape, which clearly evidences the participants' involvement will be necessary. As always, adequate evidence of identity is necessary.

What are the ethical issues around using personal data collected by a third party?

Many researchers have an opportunity to undertake statistical analysis of personal data gathered by a third party. Also quite often, researchers are asked to share personal data that they have collected with a third party who wishes to analyse it. Researchers frequently enquire about whether they need ethics approval if they are using data collected by someone else, or about what ethical issues they need to take into account if sharing data that they have collected with a third party.

AUTEC advises AUT researchers, who intend undertaking statistical analysis of personal data gathered by a third party, that ethics approval is not usually required when the data has been de-identified and aggregated. In this case, all that is required is that the third party has appropriate and adequate consent from those whose data is involved to share the data in this manner. Where the data will not be de-identified and aggregated then the researcher may need to seek ethics approval. In this case, if the data involves health related records, then ethics approval must be sought through a Health and Disability Ethics Committee in accordance with the Health Research Council's Referral Guidelines.

In the case of AUT researchers sharing their data with third parties, what is important is whether the sharing of the data is adequately included within the conditions of the informed and voluntary consent that was sought and obtained from those whose data it is. AUTEC reminds researchers of the obligation under New Zealand law to use personal data only for the purposes for which it was collected and to destroy the data once that purpose has been fulfilled. Furthermore, AUTEC prefers that any sharing of data with third parties that is adequately covered by the consent should be done in a de-identified and aggregated manner as there are issues of privacy and confidentiality to be considered. Where the researcher has guaranteed confidentiality to the participants, then they may not share that data in a manner that enables the participants to be identified.

What is the difference between Assent and Consent?

When obtaining informed consent, a distinction needs to be made between consent and assent.

Assent

Assent is simply an agreement. Anyone who can communicate can indicate whether or not they agree with something. In the context of research, it is the ability to say 'yes' to undertaking the research and is something that every participant needs to do.

Consent

Consent is legally acceptable or binding agreement. Consent requires legal capacity and in New Zealand can only be given by a person who is aged 16 or older. Consent to participate is required for all research, and where participants are unable to consent due to age or some other lack of capacity, then consent needs to be sought from the person who has the appropriate authority to give that consent. Generally speaking, only parents or legal guardians may give consent on behalf of a legal minor and only a person with an enduring power of attorney may give consent on behalf of an adult who lacks capacity.

When can someone give consent on behalf of someone else?

Researchers are advised that the circumstances in which consent is legally able to be given by a person on behalf of another are very constrained.

Generally speaking, only parents or legal guardians may give consent on behalf of a legal minor and only a person with an enduring power of attorney may give consent on behalf of an adult who lacks capacity.

Whenever consent by another person is possible and legally acceptable, it is still necessary to take the wishes of the participant into account, taking into consideration any limitations they may have in understanding or communicating them.

Further resources

Researchers looking at these options will find the following helpful:

the provisions of the Protection of Personal and Property Rights Act 1988
the Ministry of Education's Informed Consent Guidelines
the National Ethics Advisory Council’s Ethical Guidelines for Intervention Studies (part 6)
the National Ethics Advisory Council’s Ethical Guidelines for Observational Studies (par 6.20).

Safety and Risk

Are there any special requirements associated with the collection of sensitive data?

Sensitive data is data that can be used to identify an individual, object or location and has a risk of discrimination, harm or unwanted attention. Sensitive data potentially poses a substantial threat to those who are or who have been involved in it, especially if it is shared inappropriately, or if it falls into the wrong hands.

Areas in which research data is likely to be threatening include:

Where research intrudes into the private sphere or delves into some deeply personal or emotional experience (e.g. experience of a serious medical condition or disability, sexual or religious practices, experience of abuse, death or violence);
Where the study is concerned with deviant, illegal or objectionable behaviours (e.g. the data reveals information that is stigmatizing or incriminating);
Where the study impinges on the vested interests of powerful persons or the exercise of coercion or domination (e.g. where the research is about social conflict or where participants may face political threat, discrimination or stigma).

The central issue for a sensitive data safety management protocol is the prevention of accidental disclosure of the identity of a participant or their personal information. If you are collecting sensitive data, you need to provide a Data Safety Management Protocol (see a guide to drafting one).

In addition, it is essential that you clearly advise participants that in the case of sensitive data, the University has custodial rights over the data from its collection through to its secure destruction.

May I interview or research with people at home?

The answer to this question is in two parts since there are separate issues associated with the use of the researcher's home and with the use of the participants' homes.

The standard practice at AUT is that it is not acceptable for researchers to use their homes to conduct research with participants. This applies to postgraduate students in particular, but is also applicable to staff. AUTEC will approve applications where the researcher is intending to invite participants to her or his home only in exceptional circumstances.

There are often times when it is most appropriate for researchers to visit participants in their homes in order to collect data, either by interview, test or observation. When researchers are intending to do this, AUTEC advises them to implement appropriate safety measures. This may include ensuring that one is accompanied by a colleague, reporting to a colleague when entering and leaving a participant's home, or ensuring that a colleague has a schedule of one's visits for a particular morning or afternoon. Especially when visiting participants who are in some way vulnerable, researchers need to ensure that they are appropriately accompanied and that appropriate protocols are followed. When visiting participants in their homes, researchers always need to act in culturally and socially sensitive ways, remembering that they are guests and that it is the participants who are doing the researchers the favour by agreeing to participate and share their homes.

What are AUTEC's requirements for Researcher Safety?

Often research requires that researchers undertake interviews or other activity in situations that put them at risk*, e.g. interviewing participants in their homes, undertaking research in an unfamiliar cultural or social context.

In these cases, AUTEC requires researchers to make suitable arrangements for their safety and to outline these for AUTEC in a researcher safety protocol (go here to view a guide for drafting a researcher safety protocol).  Given the variety of situations and activities that may be involved, there is no standard format for such a protocol.  Usually, it includes arranging for colleagues or someone who can be expected to care about one's safety to be aware of one's travel plans or interviewing schedules, having suitable contact networks in the field, and ensuring that there is some sort of confirmation process before and after an appointment.  It is also prudent to outline what the colleague or partner will do should the confirmation not eventuate.

The safety protocol may also include ensuring that one is accompanied by a colleague, reporting to a colleague when entering and leaving a participant's home, or ensuring that a colleague has a schedule of one's visits for a particular morning or afternoon.  Especially when visiting participants who are in some way vulnerable, researchers need to ensure that they are appropriately accompanied and that appropriate protocols are followed.  When visiting participants in their homes, researchers always need to act in culturally and socially sensitive ways, remembering that they are guests and that it is the participants who are doing the researchers the favour by agreeing to participate in the research and to share their homes.

Researchers are advised that the standard practice at AUT is that it is not acceptable for researchers to use their own homes to conduct research with participants.  This applies to postgraduate students in particular, but is also applicable to staff.  AUTEC will approve applications where the researcher is intending to invite participants to her or his home only in exceptional circumstances.

Researchers travelling overseas need to be familiar with any travel warnings that are in place for the location to which they are travelling and to have undertaken consultation with relevant groups and authorities about how best to conduct research within the culture and jurisdiction to which they are travelling.

*For an understanding of how researchers may be at risk, applicants are advised to look at this report into the safety of researchers and to view A code of practice for the safety of Social Researchers.

When do I need to provide counselling opportunities for participants, and who pays?

There are a number of factors that you need to take into consideration when deciding whether to provide counselling opportunities for participants. These include, though are not limited to:

Is it likely that participants will recall, revisit, or re-live traumatic events?
Is the topic or nature of your research one that is likely to elicit the sort of distress that would require counselling?
Is your research likely to be quite challenging for the sort of people that you are asking to participate?
Is there a reasonable probability that your participants will be at risk of harm?

When considering these issues, it is important to neither overstate nor dismiss any potential risk. Responsible researching involves providing reasonable care for your participants.

If you do decide that it would be prudent to provide counselling opportunities, then the next issue is to decide which health providers you will use. It is important that any opportunities you provide will not require any payment from the participant. When counselling is required as a consequence of your research, then you need to ensure that your participants do not pay for the consultations. For adult participants in the Auckland region, the usual counselling provider that you should offer is AUT Student Counselling and Mental Health.

AUT Student Counselling and Mental Health can provide up to three free sessions of counselling for research participants, where the researcher is an AUT student or staff member and has AUTEC approval. These sessions are only available for issues that have arisen directly as a result of their participation in the research, and are not for other general counselling needs. If your participant is an AUT student, then they are entitled to access AUT Student Counselling and Mental Health free of charge and may not be limited to three counselling sessions. When offering the use of AUT Student Counselling and Mental Health, there is an agreed wording that you will need to include in your Information Sheet. You will find this in the Information Sheet exemplar.

Should a participant wish to use the counselling sessions, they will need to identify you and the research project they have been involved in when they make their appointment. The counselling is face-to-face onsite in the AUT Student Counselling & Mental Health Centres or online via a video call. This counselling provision cannot accommodate crisis work, so in that situation the participant would need to access their own health provider or Community Mental Health Services as soon as possible. You can find out more information about AUT counsellors and counselling.

If your participants are adults outside the Auckland region, then you will need to locate an appropriate local or online service close to them and make any necessary arrangements with those services. Many researchers provide the contact numbers for free publicly available telephone services such as Lifeline, Youthline, Outline et cetera. There may also be services linked to the area of your research, e.g. Depression Helpline, Chinese Lifeline, Wellington Samaritans, Problem Gambling, and many others.

Counselling services for children are not available at AUT. If you are conducting your research within a school community, then you may be able to access the local school counsellor. Please note that this option may not be appropriate if the school counsellor is involved in or is the focus of the research. There are also telephone services such as Kidsline and Youthline.

These are some suggestions. It is up to you to find a suitable free service that is appropriate for your research and to provide your participants and AUTEC with advice about how the services you have chosen may be accessed if they are needed.

Animal Ethics

What do I do if my teaching or research will involve animals?

The use of animals in teaching or research is governed by the Animal Welfare Act 1999 and all such activity requires ethics approval from an Animal Ethics Committee that has been authorised by the Minister of Agriculture in accordance with an approved Code of Conduct. Codes of conduct are approved and monitored by the Minister of Agriculture through the National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee. Teachers and researchers need to be familiar with their Good Practice Guide for the Use of Animals in Research, Testing and Teaching.

AUT has a Memorandum of Understanding with The University of Auckland which allows AUT staff or students who need to apply for ethics approval for animal research and learning under The University of Auckland's Code of Conduct to apply to The University of Auckland Animal Ethics Committee (UAAEC). It also allows for AUT staff or students to apply for approval of standard operating procedures for an animal research facility. Please note that the approval of standard operating procedures does not constitute AUT organisational approval to operate an animal research facility.

AUT Researchers and teachers wishing to use animals should contact the Secretary of the UAAEC in the first instance. A flow chart detailing the process for application to the UAAEC is available for AUT staff or students.

Please note that the coversheet supplied by the UAAEC for AUT researchers will need to be signed off by the Head of Department, the Associate Dean (Research) and the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research) and then submitted to the Research Ethics Lead along with the application and an internal charge docket (ICD).

AUT researchers and teachers are advised that they will need to be able to meet the fees for application and monitoring from their own research or teaching budgets.

Click on these links for further information about animal ethics in New Zealand and The University of Auckland's processes.