The debate around ethics review boards (IRBs) has assumed an increasingly central place in academic practice and discourse. In this article, we summarize a unique workshop (study-group) that convened at the University of Haifa, attended by 27 academics from around the globe, representing nine countries in four continents. The participants presented data and points of view, which served as the basis for an open, interdisciplinary discussion. The group developed a set of recommendations, including working toward a transition from a review system to an advisory and validation system; focusing on respectful research approach to participants, rather than “ethical” research; building a procedure that focuses on feedback, rather than the process itself; recognizing that a unified examination need not necessarily be standardized; and constructing a feedback procedure in which researchers can respond to the review of their research.
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
We thank the University of Haifa for its support and for hosting the conference. The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: We thank the National Science Fund for its help and support in financing the study and the conference.
© The Author(s) 2020.
- Multinational perspectives
- critical analysis
- moral perspectives
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health