Mary-Helen, I'm in Australia and I am the chief investigator. My supervisor is listed as my supervisor and the point of query should participants wish to go over my head with regard to questions or complaints about the research process. I thought that was common for Oz universities. Maybe it's the Melbourne-Sydney rivalry thing rearing its head again. Paul. -----Original Message----- From: mhward [mailto:mhward@usyd.edu.au] Sent: Wednesday, 15 August 2007 10:03 To: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: [Air-L] Ethics and grad students Something that I'm not clear about - and an international perspective on this issue... At my university in Australia, where I am enrolled as a PhD candidate, the ethics application for my PhD project listed my main supervisor as the chief investigator, and then me as another investigator. I believe this is common here. If there is any comeback from a participant I am well protected, provided I continue to discuss what I am doing with my supervisor and not go outside the bounds of the original ethics approval without applying for an extension to that. I notice a couple of comments (see below for one) about the situation for grad students (I assume in the US as no detail is given) which seem to imply that this is not the case elsewhere. Can anyone clarify? M-H On 15/8/07 9:40 AM, "Lois Ann Scheidt" <lscheidt@indiana.edu> wrote:
Gray said that "IRB fatigue" is discouraging researchers - especially graduate students - from even trying to get projects approved. * * *
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/