Research Ethics in Humanities and Social Sciences: between the norm and its application

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Guerriero , Iara Coelho Zito
Data de Publicação: 2023
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Práxis Educativa (Online)
Texto Completo: https://revistas.uepg.br/index.php/praxiseducativa/article/view/21203
Resumo: In this article, it is discussed the importance of identifying and respecting the ethical specificities of research in Human and Social Sciences, in order to point out the relevance of the ethical education for the researcher and the adequate guidelines for these investigations. It is identified that the National Commission for Research Ethics (CONEP) continues with the positivist hegemony, represented by the vast biomedical majority, which results in contradictory guidelines on the use of the Resolution no. 510/2016, in terms of the composition of Research Ethics Committees and the ethical appreciation of research projects. From the experience as a member of CONEP, the publicly available material is analyzed, produced by CONEP and several contradictory guidelines with the Resolution no. 510/2016 are identified. It is important to defend it in its text and work towards an ethical review system in which there is the appreciation of the contextualized experience, with the objective of revealing the “top to bottom” logic and overcoming the hegemony that a single definition of research and of ethics “serves” for all areas. Keywords: Ethics. Humanities and Social Sciences. National Commission for Research Ethics (CONEP).
id UEPG-26_87f3190232800869525ae909799a3e0e
oai_identifier_str oai:uepg.br:article/21203
network_acronym_str UEPG-26
network_name_str Práxis Educativa (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Research Ethics in Humanities and Social Sciences: between the norm and its applicationLa ética en las investigaciones en Ciencias Humanas y Sociales: entre la norma y su aplicaciónÉtica nas pesquisas em Ciências Humanas e Sociais: entre a norma e sua aplicaçãoIn this article, it is discussed the importance of identifying and respecting the ethical specificities of research in Human and Social Sciences, in order to point out the relevance of the ethical education for the researcher and the adequate guidelines for these investigations. It is identified that the National Commission for Research Ethics (CONEP) continues with the positivist hegemony, represented by the vast biomedical majority, which results in contradictory guidelines on the use of the Resolution no. 510/2016, in terms of the composition of Research Ethics Committees and the ethical appreciation of research projects. From the experience as a member of CONEP, the publicly available material is analyzed, produced by CONEP and several contradictory guidelines with the Resolution no. 510/2016 are identified. It is important to defend it in its text and work towards an ethical review system in which there is the appreciation of the contextualized experience, with the objective of revealing the “top to bottom” logic and overcoming the hegemony that a single definition of research and of ethics “serves” for all areas. Keywords: Ethics. Humanities and Social Sciences. National Commission for Research Ethics (CONEP).En este artículo se discute la importancia de identificar y respetar las especificidades éticas de las investigaciones en Ciencias Humanas y Sociales, con la intención de señalar la relevancia de la formación ética del investigador y de normas adecuadas para estas investigaciones. Se identifica que la Comisión Nacional de Ética de Investigación (CONEP) continúa con la hegemonía positivista, representada por la amplia mayoría biomédica, lo que resulta en orientaciones contradictorias sobre la utilización de la Resolución No 510/2016, en cuanto a la composición de los Comités de Ética en Investigación y de la evaluación ética de los proyectos de investigación. A partir de la vivencia como miembro de la CONEP, se analiza el material disponible públicamente producido por la CONEP y se identifican varias orientaciones contradictorias con la Resolución No 510/2016. Es importante defenderla en su texto y trabajar hacia un sistema de revisión ética en que haya valorización de la experiencia contextualizada, con el objetivo de invertir la lógica “de arriba hacia abajo” y superar la hegemonía de que una única definición de investigación y de ética “sirve” para todas las áreas. Palabras clave: Ética. Ciencias Humanas y Sociales. Comisión Nacional de Ética en Investigación (CONEP).Neste artigo, discute-se a importância de identificar e de respeitar as especificidades éticas das pesquisas em Ciências Humanas e Sociais, no intuito de apontar a relevância da formação ética do pesquisador e de normas adequadas para essas pesquisas. Identifica-se que a Comissão Nacional de Ética em Pesquisa (Conep) continua com a hegemonia positivista, representada pela ampla maioria biomédica, o que resulta em orientações contraditórias sobre a utilização da Resolução No 510/2016, em termos de composição dos Comitês de Ética em Pesquisa e da apreciação ética dos projetos de pesquisa. A partir da vivência como membro da Conep, analisa-se o material publicamente disponível, produzido pela Conep, e identificam-se várias orientações contraditórias com a Resolução No 510/2016. É importante defendê-la em seu texto e trabalhar para um sistema de revisão ética em que haja a valorização da experiência contextualizada, com o objetivo de inverter a lógica “de cima para baixo” e superar a hegemonia de que uma única definição de pesquisa e de ética “serve” para todas as áreas. Palavras-chave: Ética. Ciências Humanas e Sociais. Comissão Nacional de Ética em Pesquisa (Conep).Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa2023-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdftext/xmlhttps://revistas.uepg.br/index.php/praxiseducativa/article/view/2120310.5212/PraxEduc.v.18.21203.010Práxis Educativa; Vol. 18 (2023): Publicação contínua; 1-18Práxis Educativa; Vol. 18 (2023): Publicação contínua; 1-18Práxis Educativa; V. 18 (2023): Publicação contínua; 1-18Práxis Educativa; v. 18 (2023): Publicação contínua; 1-181809-43091809-4031reponame:Práxis Educativa (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa (UEPG)instacron:UEPGporhttps://revistas.uepg.br/index.php/praxiseducativa/article/view/21203/209209217108https://revistas.uepg.br/index.php/praxiseducativa/article/view/21203/209209217337Copyright (c) 2022 Práxis Educativahttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGuerriero , Iara Coelho Zito2024-01-12T15:57:24Zoai:uepg.br:article/21203Revistahttp://www.revistas2.uepg.br/index.php/praxiseducativaPUBhttps://revistas2.uepg.br/index.php/praxiseducativa/oaipraxiseducativa@uepg.br||praxiseducativa@uepg.br1809-43091809-4031opendoar:2024-01-12T15:57:24Práxis Educativa (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa (UEPG)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Research Ethics in Humanities and Social Sciences: between the norm and its application
La ética en las investigaciones en Ciencias Humanas y Sociales: entre la norma y su aplicación
Ética nas pesquisas em Ciências Humanas e Sociais: entre a norma e sua aplicação
title Research Ethics in Humanities and Social Sciences: between the norm and its application
spellingShingle Research Ethics in Humanities and Social Sciences: between the norm and its application
Guerriero , Iara Coelho Zito
title_short Research Ethics in Humanities and Social Sciences: between the norm and its application
title_full Research Ethics in Humanities and Social Sciences: between the norm and its application
title_fullStr Research Ethics in Humanities and Social Sciences: between the norm and its application
title_full_unstemmed Research Ethics in Humanities and Social Sciences: between the norm and its application
title_sort Research Ethics in Humanities and Social Sciences: between the norm and its application
author Guerriero , Iara Coelho Zito
author_facet Guerriero , Iara Coelho Zito
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Guerriero , Iara Coelho Zito
description In this article, it is discussed the importance of identifying and respecting the ethical specificities of research in Human and Social Sciences, in order to point out the relevance of the ethical education for the researcher and the adequate guidelines for these investigations. It is identified that the National Commission for Research Ethics (CONEP) continues with the positivist hegemony, represented by the vast biomedical majority, which results in contradictory guidelines on the use of the Resolution no. 510/2016, in terms of the composition of Research Ethics Committees and the ethical appreciation of research projects. From the experience as a member of CONEP, the publicly available material is analyzed, produced by CONEP and several contradictory guidelines with the Resolution no. 510/2016 are identified. It is important to defend it in its text and work towards an ethical review system in which there is the appreciation of the contextualized experience, with the objective of revealing the “top to bottom” logic and overcoming the hegemony that a single definition of research and of ethics “serves” for all areas. Keywords: Ethics. Humanities and Social Sciences. National Commission for Research Ethics (CONEP).
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://revistas.uepg.br/index.php/praxiseducativa/article/view/21203
10.5212/PraxEduc.v.18.21203.010
url https://revistas.uepg.br/index.php/praxiseducativa/article/view/21203
identifier_str_mv 10.5212/PraxEduc.v.18.21203.010
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://revistas.uepg.br/index.php/praxiseducativa/article/view/21203/209209217108
https://revistas.uepg.br/index.php/praxiseducativa/article/view/21203/209209217337
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Práxis Educativa
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Práxis Educativa
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
text/xml
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Práxis Educativa; Vol. 18 (2023): Publicação contínua; 1-18
Práxis Educativa; Vol. 18 (2023): Publicação contínua; 1-18
Práxis Educativa; V. 18 (2023): Publicação contínua; 1-18
Práxis Educativa; v. 18 (2023): Publicação contínua; 1-18
1809-4309
1809-4031
reponame:Práxis Educativa (Online)
instname:Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa (UEPG)
instacron:UEPG
instname_str Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa (UEPG)
instacron_str UEPG
institution UEPG
reponame_str Práxis Educativa (Online)
collection Práxis Educativa (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Práxis Educativa (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa (UEPG)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv praxiseducativa@uepg.br||praxiseducativa@uepg.br
_version_ 1799317615865233408