Ethics code and procedures
Introduction
1. The University of Northampton is committed to maintaining ethical
research and practice throughout the institution and will expect and so far
as possible require those working with the institution as partners or
contractors to act ethically.
2. Professional and academic communities are placing increasingly exacting
responsibilities on their members to improve the ethical standards of
research and practice within their disciplines, and journal editors may
require evidence that research projects have secured formal ethical
clearance before agreeing to publish their findings.
3. The Code of Practice for Research Ethics: a Handbook of Principles and
Procedures has been produced in response to this growing awareness of
ethically sensitive issues in research and scholarly activity. Its intention is
to provide advice for postgraduate research degree students at the
University of Northampton and to promote a strong appreciation of ethical
considerations in research. The procedures are intended to be facilitative,
not restrictive or inhibitory.
4. The Handbook comprises two parts:
Part A is a statement of ethical principles designed to articulate a common
set of values to guide and support the professional conduct of academic
research and research-related activities. It applies principally to all
research involving human subjects and participants.
Part B contains the procedures by which ethical issues are addressed
5. For the purposes of this code, the following definitions are used for the
various types of research and scholarly activities and are for the most part
those articulated by the Roith Report (PCFC, 1990), which have gained
wide acceptance within higher education:
o Funded Research - research that is funded in whole or in part by an
organisation other than the University of Northampton
o Staff Research Programmes - an agreed programme of research
undertaken by a member of staff under the auspices of the
University of Northampton that is not Funded Research
o Postgraduate Research Degrees - a research degree involving a
programme of research undertaken by a postgraduate student
registered at the University of Northampton
o Undergraduate Dissertations and Postgraduate Taught Degree
Dissertations - a research programme for a dissertation undertaken
by an undergraduate or postgraduate student registered at the
University of Northampton
o Institutional Research - any research conducted or commissioned
by the University of Northampton.
o Basic Research - experimental and theoretical work undertaken to
acquire new knowledge of the underlying foundation of phenomena
and observable facts, without any particular application or use in
view.
1
o
o
o
o
o
o
Strategic Research - applied research that is in a subject area
which has not yet advanced to the stage where eventual
applications can be clearly specified.
Applied Research - work undertaken in order to acquire new
knowledge. It is, however, directed primarily towards practical aims
or objectives.
Scholarship - work which is intended to expand the boundaries of
knowledge within and across disciplines by in depth analysis,
synthesis and interpretation of ideas and information and by
making use of rigorous and documented methodology.
Creative Work - the invention and generation of ideas, images and
artefacts including design. Usually applied to the pursuit of
knowledge in the arts.
Consultancy - the deployment of existing knowledge for the
resolution of specific problems presented by a client, usually in an
industrial or commercial context.
Professional Practice - a variant of consultancy applied to certain
well-defined professions, for example, law, accounting,
architecture, nursing, and social work.
6. The following statement of principles places a considerable emphasis on
the personal responsibility of researchers to act ethically and to promote
ethical behaviour in all aspects of research activities. It is also recognised
that statements of principles and procedures cannot expect to cover every
aspect of a complex area such as research ethics. For these reasons, the
Research Ethics Committee - which will operate and monitor the
procedures described in this Handbook for postgraduate research degree
students-, would welcome comments and suggestions for future
enhancements from individuals, research units, or any other interested
parties.
Part A: Principles
1 - Introduction
1.1 The primary responsibility for the conduct of ethical research lies with the
researcher. It is a fundamental principle that staff and students engaged in
research adopt a continuing personal commitment to act ethically, to encourage
ethical behaviour in those with whom they collaborate, and to consult where
appropriate concerning ethical issues.
1.2 The University of Northampton acknowledges the importance of the
professional codes of conduct of external agencies and organisations, and accords
them primacy as a default position.
2 - General responsibilities
2.1 Towards research participants
Researchers have a responsibility to ensure as far as possible that the physical,
social and psychological wellbeing of their research participants is not
detrimentally affected by the research. Research relationships should be
characterised, whenever possible, by mutual respect and trust.
2.2 Towards other researchers
Researchers should avoid, wherever possible, actions which may have deleterious
2
consequences for other researchers or which might undermine the reputation of
their discipline. Those directing research should bear in mind their responsibilities
towards members of their research teams and should aim to anticipate and guard
against the possible harmful consequences of the research for team members.
3 - Informed consent
3.1 Research should be based, as far as possible and practicable, on the freely
given informed consent of those under study. However, it is recognised that in
some cases it may be necessary to employ covert methods should these
constitute the only means to obtain the required data. In such cases, please refer
to section 4.
3.2 It is the responsibility of the researcher to explain as fully as is reasonable
and appropriate and in terms meaningful to the participants:







the aims and nature of the research
who is undertaking it
who is funding it
its likely duration
why it is being undertaken
the possible consequences of the research
how the results are to be disseminated
3.3 The power imbalance between researcher and researched should be
considered. Care should be taken to ensure that the latter are not pressurised
into participation. Research participants should be aware of their right to refuse
participation at any time and should not be given the impression that they are
required to participate. It should also be recognised that research may involve a
lengthy data-gathering period and that it may be necessary to regard consent not
as obtained once and for all, but subject to renegotiation over time.
3.4 The researcher should explain how far research participants will be afforded
anonymity and confidentiality and participants should have the option of rejecting
the use of data-gathering devices such as tape recorders and video cameras.
3.5 If there is a likelihood of data being shared with or divulged to other
researchers, the potential uses of the data should be discussed with the
participants and their agreement to such use should be obtained.
3.6 Where access to a research setting is gained through a gatekeeper external
to the college, researchers should also obtain the informed consent of research
participants, while at the same time taking account of the gatekeeper's interests.
It should be borne in mind that the relationship between research participant and
gatekeeper may well continue long after the research has been undertaken.
3.7 Where research participants are young children or other vulnerable groups
such as elderly, disabled or sick people, or people with learning difficulties whose
understanding is impaired in some way so that they are unable to give full
informed consent, it may be necessary to use a proxy in order to gather data. In
this case great care must be taken not to intrude upon the privacy of the
vulnerable participants. The researcher should consult relevant professionals,
parents, guardians and relatives, as appropriate. Researchers should attempt to
obtain the informed consent of children and their parents and in relation to
schoolchildren those who are acting in the place of a parent.
3
3.8 In addition to obtaining the informed consent of those under study,
researchers should attempt to anticipate and guard against the possible harmful
consequences of their research for participants.
4 - Deceptive and covert research
4.1 Researchers should not use deception in their research methods, as this
violates the principle of informed consent and may invade the privacy of those
under study, particularly in non-public spaces.
4.2 It is acknowledged that an occasion may arise when limited deception may be
justified. A researcher considering any deceptive methods in research must seek
advice from the Research Ethics Committee. The burden of proof will rest on the
investigator to show that no alternative methods are possible and that the data
sought are of sufficient value to over-ride the issues of free and informed
consent. Where advice has been given, the potential implications arising from
publication must be fully considered.
4.3 Covert research in non-public spaces - spaces where persons would not
normally expect to be under observation - or experimental manipulation of
research participants without their knowledge should be a last resort when it is
impossible to use other methods to obtain the required data. It is particularly
important in such cases to safeguard the anonymity of participants.
4.4 If covert methods are approved and employed, and informed consent has not
been obtained prior to the research, every attempt should be made to obtain this
after the research.
5 - Confidentiality and anonymity
5.1 The anonymity and privacy of research participants should be respected and
personal information relating to participants should be kept confidential and
secure. Researchers must comply with the provisions of the Data Protection Act
and should consider whether it is proper or appropriate even to record certain
kinds of sensitive information.
5.2 Where possible, threats to the confidentiality and anonymity of research data
should be anticipated by researchers and normally the identities and research
records of participants should be kept confidential, whether or not an explicit
pledge of confidentiality has been given.
5.3 Whilst the researcher should take every practicable measure to ensure the
confidentiality and anonymity of research participants, they should also take care
not to give unrealistic assurances or guarantees of confidentiality. Research
participants with easily identifiable characteristics or positions within an
organisation should be reminded that it may be difficult to disguise their identity
totally without distorting the data.
6 - Procedures for approval
6.1 Set against the principles expressed above, specific approval is required for:
1. research which involves biomedical or clinical intervention
4
2. research which comes within the National Health Service (NHS) Research
Governance Framework and involves NHS patients, staff premises, records
and so on
3. deceptive research which is defined as research where an investigator
actively sets out significantly to misrepresent himself or herself, the nature
of the research, or any other significant characteristics of the research
4. certain classes of covert research, in particular those where the data are
not recorded in a manner that protects the anonymity of subjects or
participants, where the research topic is one dealing with sensitive aspects
of the subject's or participant's behaviour, or where proposals for research
involve vulnerable populations (consult Appendix 4 for further
guidance).Procedures for postgraduate research students gaining advice
are contained in Part B.
6.2 Other than adherence to the principles expressed in this section, no specific
advice is required for research that does not fall into these categories.
Part B: Procedures
1. Introduction
1.1 Procedural principles
Following the principles that underpin the University of Northampton's general
quality assurance systems, responsibility for ensuring that research is conducted
in an ethical way lies at the closest point possible to its actual conduct.
Responsibility for the ethical conduct of research, therefore, rests primarily with
the person who is planning and undertaking a project - the role of the Research
Ethics Committee (REC), School Research Ethics Committee (SREC) and School
Ethics Committee (SEC) is provide advice that may inform the process as well as
approve projects. The procedures are intended to be facilitative, not restrictive or
inhibitory.
1.2 Postgraduate Research Degrees
a) Where a student or a supervisor identifies an ethical issue relating to
Postgraduate Research Degrees it is strongly advised that the matter be referred
to the REC. However, such referral is not mandatory for all proposals. In schools
where research is undertaken that may be described as particularly sensitive
because for example it regularly involves gathering primary data from
participants, a local procedure must be established which includes the SREC or
SEC to ensure that the ethical issues are addressed. Where necessary a referral
to the REC should be made by the researcher or the supervisory team or through
the school's procedure or by the appropriate Research Degrees Board or the
Research Degrees Committee. Notification that due care and attention has been
given to ethical issues will be signalled on form REG1
b) Where a referral to the Research Ethics Committee is found to be necessary,
the researcher or the supervisory team should, when submitting the
documentation to the Research Degrees Board Officer, request that it be
considered by the Research Ethics Committee as well as the Research Degrees
Board. The Officer will pass a copy of the documentation to the Research Ethics
Committee, who will report back to the Research Degrees Board and, where
necessary, joint comments from the Board and Committee will be made to the
5
student and supervisory team. Following emendation according to any
recommendations, submission should again be made to the Research Degrees
Board Officer, who will obtain either approval, where possible by chair's action
from the Board and Committee, or further advice if the requirements have been
not been fulfilled. Meetings of the Board and Committee will so far as possible be
synchronised, however time should be allowed for due consideration when
documentation is submitted.
c) This procedure does not preclude a student or supervisory team from seeking
advice or approval from the Research Ethics Committee other than at registration
or transfer, for example prior to registration or when an ethical issue arises
during the course of the research.
1.3 Staff research programmes
Members of staff engaged in a Staff Research Programme shall set out a strategy
for dealing with any ethical issues when agreeing a programme for research with
the Research Leader or his or her nominee. This will usually be with reference to
a discipline related ethical code of practice. The Research Leader should record
that ethical issues have been dealt with in relation to the programme, giving
details where appropriate. Where further consideration is appropriate reference
should be made to the SREC or SEC. In cases of doubt, reference may be made
either directly or through the School’s procedure to the REC. Where research is
undertaken by the Research Leader and an ethical consideration arises then a
strategy must be agreed with the Dean of School, and the other way around. If
both are engaged in research where an ethical issue arises reference should be
made to the REC.
1.4 Funded Research and Consultancy
Each school shall establish a procedure for the consideration of ethical issues in
relation to Funded Research and Consultancy, as set out below. Where ethical
issues arise in relation to Funded Research, a strategy must be agreed between
the researcher, the institution, as represented by the Dean of School or Research
Leader, or school committee designated to deal with such matter, and the
sponsor. In cases of doubt or where there is a conflict of interest reference shall
be made to the Chairperson of the Research Ethics Committee or nominee.
1.5 Undergraduate Dissertations and Postgraduate Taught Degree Dissertations
Undergraduate Dissertations and Postgraduate Taught Degree Dissertations shall
pass through a procedure as established in each School of The University of
Northampton as set out below.
1.6 Institutional Research
Institutional Research shall pass through a Department's procedure as set out
below.
2. Ethics Committees’ Procedures
2.1 Research ethics committee
6
2.1.2 Purpose
The Research Ethics Committee will be convened as a sub-committee of the
Research Degrees Committee – its primary business shall be:
 to monitor and inform the Research Degrees Committee and Research
Committee, as appropriate, on national and international developments in
research ethics and
 the consideration and approval in relation to ethical matters of:
a) postgraduate student research degree projects
b) funded research and consultancy, research by staff and other research
activities referred by schools
2.1.3 Terms of reference
Institutional Research Ethics Framework:
 to advise the Research Degrees Committee on the development of
institutional policies and guidelines relating to ethical issues arising from
postgraduate education, research, consultancy and other related activities
 to contribute to informed debate within the university community
and disseminate good practice
 to contribute to institutional responses to national and international
developments relating to ethical issues
 to maintain reference material on ethical guidelines produced by
professional bodies, funding councils and other national bodies
 to consider any matters referred by Senate, the Research Committee, the
Research Degrees Committee, Research Degree Boards, Schools and
individual members of staff
Approval and monitoring:
 to monitor university practice in relation to postgraduate education,
research, consultancy and other related activities and ensure practice
meets nationally accepted standards
 to monitor the operation of School Research Ethics Committees and School
Ethics committees and to receive regular reports and minutes
 to provide advice to schools, supervisory teams and individual members of
staff on ethical issues
 to approve in relation to ethical issues postgraduate student research
degree projects at all stages, including enrolment, registration and
transfer of research degree students and advanced postgraduate student
status, and matters referred by School Ethics Committees and School
Research Ethics Committees
 to review and audit ongoing research and consultancy projects and to
provide documentation of systems and outcomes
 to receive an annual report from the School Research Ethics Committees
on the activities of the committee
 to report annually to the Research Degrees Committee on the activities of
the committee
Training and development:
 to develop, deliver and monitor staff training in relation to research ethics
issues and good practice
 to maintain the Research Ethics Handbook and associated guidelines
2.1.4 Membership

Chair appointed by Senate
7








Chair of the Research Degrees Committee
Dean of the Graduate School
Business Development Manager - Research
Chair of the School Research Ethics Committee or School Ethics
Committee, as appropriate, or their nominees
Postgraduate student representative nominated by the student body
Chair or representative from the Occupational Health Safety and Welfare
Committee
Lay Member independent of the Institution whose appointment shall be for
a period not exceeding three years
Up to four co-opted members appointed for such purpose and for such
time as the committee shall determine but such an appointment shall not
exceed three years
2.2 School research ethics committees
2.2.1 Purpose
School Research Ethics Committees will be convened as sub-committees of the
Research Ethics Committee (REC) – their primary business shall be:
 the consideration of postgraduate student research degree
projects, taught programme student projects and funded research
and consultancy, research by staff and other research activities
2.2.2 Terms of reference
School Research Ethics Framework:
 to provide advice to supervisory teams and individual members of staff on
ethical issues arising from undergraduate and postgraduate education,
research, consultancy and school practice
 to contribute to the development of good practice within the school
 to contribute to informed debate within the university community
 to consider any matters referred by Senate, the Research Committee, the
Research Degrees Committee, the Research Ethics Committee, Research
Degree Boards, Schools and individual members of staff
Approval and monitoring:
 to provide advice to students, supervisory teams and individual members
of staff on ethical issues
 to approve in relation to ethical issues postgraduate student research
degree projects, including applications for research degree student
registration and advanced postgraduate student status, undergraduate
and postgraduate taught programme dissertations and projects, staff
research and funded research and consultancy
 to review and audit ongoing research and consultancy projects and to
provide documentation of systems and outcomes
 to refer matters for consideration and advice to the REC - the REC shall be
able call in any matter that comes before the SREC for the REC to decide
 to maintain appropriate records and to report regularly to the REC minutes of the SREC must be sent to the REC
2.2.3 Membership

Chair of the Research Ethics Committee shall have a right of attendance

Dean of School or nominee - Chair
8





Research Leaders
Member from each division
Postgraduate student representative nominated by the student body
Member independent of the institution
Up to three co-opted members appointed for such purpose and for such
time as the Committee shall determine but such an appointment shall not
exceed three years
2.3 School ethics committees
2.3.1 Purpose
School Ethics Committees will be convened as sub-committees of the Research
Ethics Committee (REC) – their primary business shall be:
 The consideration of taught programme student dissertations and projects,
funded research and consultancy that does not require ethical approval
from a committee whose constitution complies with the REC and SREC
membership, research by staff and referring matters to the REC, which are
outside its jurisdiction.
2.3.2 Terms of reference
School Ethics Framework:
 to provide advice to supervisors and individual members of staff on ethical
issues arising from undergraduate and postgraduate education, research,
consultancy and school practice
 to contribute to the development of good practice within the school
 to contribute to informed debate within the university community
 to consider any matters referred by Senate, the Research Committee, the
Research Degrees Committee, the Research Ethics Committee, Research
Degree Boards, Schools and individual members of staff
Approval and monitoring:
 to provide advice to students, supervisory teams and individual members
of staff on ethical issues
 to approve in relation to ethical issues undergraduate and postgraduate
taught programme dissertations and projects, staff research and funded
research and consultancy that does not require ethical approval from a
committee whose constitution complies with the REC and an SREC
membership
 to review and audit ongoing research and consultancy projects and to
provide documentation of systems and outcomes
 to refer matters for consideration and advice to the REC - the REC shall be
able call in any matter that comes before the SEC for the REC to decide.
 to maintain appropriate records and to report regularly to the REC minutes of the SEC must be sent to the REC
2.3.3 Membership

Chair of the Research Ethics Committee shall have a right of attendance



Dean of School or nominee - Chair
Research Leader
Member from each division
9

Up to three co-opted members appointed for such purpose and for such
time as the committee shall determine but such an appointment shall not
exceed three years
3. Assurance procedures
3.1 Postgraduate research degrees:


completion and submission of form REG 1
all matters that come before the REC or SREC are recorded in minutes of
meetings
3.2 Staff research programmes:


record of agreed strategies kept by School Research Leader who reports to
the Dean of School
all matters that come before the SREC, SEC or REC are recorded in
minutes of meetings
3.3 Funded research and consultancy projects:



a record of strategies and so on are kept by Dean of School or School
Research Leader as appropriate
matters that come before the SREC, SEC or REC are recorded in minutes
of meetings
report of an external body such as an NHS LREC is kept by the Dean of
School with a copy to the REC
3.4 Undergraduate Dissertations and Postgraduate Taught Degree Dissertations:


method of recording strategies to be decided by the appropriate School
Academic Board in accordance with the SREC and SEC procedural template
all matters that come before the REC, SREC, and SEC are recorded in
minutes of meetings
3.5 Institutional Research:


record of agreed strategies kept by the appropriate Head of Department
all matters that come before the REC are recorded in minutes of meetings
4. School and department procedures
4.1 Introduction
Each school should have a formal ethics procedure that has been drafted to
correspond with a template produced by the Research Ethics Committee and
complements the overall institutional ethics procedure. The template was based
on existing best practice in the institution and was to ensure that there is
consistency between school procedures and that appropriate links are made with
the institutional procedure.
The School Academic Boards approve school procedures. A department's
procedure for Institutional Research will be agreed with the departments of the
University of Northampton.
10
Once approved a link to school and department procedures will appear on this
website.
4.2 School Research Ethics Committee procedure template
Procedure for approvals and referrals

Staff Research Programmes:
1. Staff must inform and agree an ethics strategy for all new research
programmes, whether externally funded or not.
2. Divisional Research leaders are responsible for annually reviewing the
ethical strategies of all continuing staff research programmes, whether
externally funded or not.
3. Staff must notify Divisional Research leaders of any ethical issues that
may arise in the course of their programme of research.
4. Both the Divisional Research Leader and the member of staff should
maintain a written record of the agreed ethical strategies to deal with
issues that are likely to arise.
5. Divisional Research Leaders are responsible for reporting to the School
Ethics Committee on strategies agreed with staff.
6. If the strategies are considered appropriate the committee shall approve
them with or without amendments or conditions and its approval shall be
minuted.
7. In cases of doubt, or where clause 6 of the Ethics code applies unless the
committee are submitting the project for approval to an NHS LREC.

Funded or Knowledge Transfer Research:
1. The Dean or School Research Leader or nominee must approve all new
externally funded research and consultancy and will see the ethical reports
of each prior to approval.
2. Staff must notify the Dean or School Research Leader or nominee of any
ethical issues that may arise in the course of their programme of research.
3. A written record of the agreed ethical strategies to deal with issues that
are likely to arise must be part of the research or consultancy
documentation.
4. The Dean or School Research Leader or nominee are responsible for
ensuring that ethical strategies of all externally funded research or
consultancy are presented to the to the School Ethics Committee.
5. If the strategies are considered appropriate the Committee shall approve
them with or without amendments or conditions and its approval shall be
minuted.
11
6. In cases of doubt or where clause 6 of the Ethics code applies the strategy
should be submitted to the Research Ethics Committee for approval unless
the Committee are submitting the project for approval to an NHS LREC.

Undergraduate Dissertations and Postgraduate Taught Degree Dissertations:
1. Students must, under the guidance of their supervisor, complete an Ethics
Form and submit it to their supervisor.
2. Where ethical issues arise a strategy to deal with them must be prepared
in writing and attached to the form.
3. The strategy must be agreed as being appropriate by the supervisor and
at least one other member of staff from the school and the acceptance of
the strategy must be shown by the supervisor and consulted tutors signing
the form or as is required by a professional association code of conduct,
for example the British Psychological Society. One copy of the form and
strategy must be retained by the tutor, another by the student and a
further copy given to the Divisional Research Leader or Dissertation Tutor.
4. The Divisional Research Leader or Dissertation Tutor are responsible for
ensuring that all agreed strategies relating to dissertations which raise
ethical issues are presented to the School Ethics Committee for approval.
The approval may, if agreed by the committee, be made by exception with
only those dissertations that raise particular issues be specifically noted.
The approval of the dissertations and any discussion relating to specific
strategies shall be minuted.
5. In cases of doubt or where clause 6 of the Ethics code applies the strategy
may be submitted to the Research Ethics Committee for approval.

Postgraduate Research Degrees:
1. All Research Degree Proposals must be submitted to the committee,
before going to the Research Degrees Board, by the Director of Studies
with a statement that there are no ethical issues or the proposals includes
an interim or full ethics strategy for any issues that may arise.
2. If the strategies are considered appropriate the committee shall approve
them with or without amendments or conditions such as submission of
information sheets, consent forms, interviews and questionnaires
procedures and content and so on, and its approval shall be minuted.
3. In cases of doubt or where clause 6 of the Ethics code applies, the
strategy should be submitted to the Research Ethics Committee for
approval unless the committee are submitting the project for approval to
an NHS LREC.
4. The director of studies is responsible for ensuring that any conditions set
by the committee are met including resubmission for approval of a
particular strategy or approval where a substantive new ethical issue
should arise in the course of the student's studies.
4.3
School Ethics Committee Procedure Template
Procedure for Approvals and Referrals
12

Staff Research Programmes:
1. Staff must inform and agree an ethics strategy for all new research
programmes, whether externally funded or not.
2. Divisional Research leaders are responsible for annually reviewing the
ethical strategies of all continuing staff research programmes, whether
externally funded or not.
3. Staff must notify Divisional Research leaders of any ethical issues that
may arise in the course of their programme of research.
4. Both the Divisional Research Leader and the member of staff should
maintain a written record of the agreed ethical strategies to deal with
issues that are likely to arise.
5. Divisional Research Leaders are responsible for reporting to the School
Ethics Committee on strategies agreed with staff.
6. If the strategies are considered appropriate the committee shall approve
them with or without amendments or conditions and its approval shall be
minuted.
7. In cases of doubt or where clause 6 of the Ethics code applies, or where
the research is funded and the funding body requires approval by a
Committee of a specified composition, the strategy must be submitted to
the Research Ethics Committee for approval.

Funded or Knowledge Transfer Research:
1. The Dean or School Research Leader or nominee must approve all new
externally funded research and consultancy and will see the ethical reports
of each prior to approval.
2. Staff must notify the Dean or School Research Leader or nominee of any
ethical issues that may arise in the course of their programme of research.
3. A written record of the agreed ethical strategies to deal with issues that
are likely to arise must be part of the research or consultancy
documentation.
4. The Dean or School Research Leader or nominee are responsible for
ensuring that ethical strategies of all externally funded research or
consultancy are presented to the to the School Ethics Committee.
5. If the strategies are considered appropriate the committee shall approve
them with or without amendments or conditions and its approval shall be
minuted.
6. In cases of doubt, or where clause 6 of the Ethics code applies, the
strategy may be submitted to the Research Ethics Committee for approval
or where the research or consultancy funding body requires approval by a
committee of a specified composition the strategy must be submitted to
the Research Ethics Committee for approval.
13

Undergraduate Dissertations and Postgraduate Taught Degree Dissertations:
1. Students must, under the guidance of their supervisor, complete an Ethics
Form and submit it to their supervisor.
2. Where ethical issues arise a strategy to deal with them must be prepared
in writing and attached to the form.
3. The strategy must be agreed as being appropriate by the supervisor and
at least one other member of staff from the school, and the acceptance of
the strategy must be shown by the supervisor and consulted tutors signing
the form or as is required by a professional association code of conduct,
for example the British Psychological Society. One copy of the form and
strategy must be retained by the tutor, another by the student and a
further copy given to the Divisional Research Leader or Dissertation Tutor.
4. The Divisional Research Leader or Dissertation Tutor are responsible for
ensuring that all agreed strategies relating to dissertations which raise
ethical issues are presented to the School Ethics Committee for approval.
The approval may, if agreed by the committee be made by exception with
only those dissertations that raise particular issues be specifically noted.
The approval of the dissertations and any discussion relating to specific
strategies shall be minuted.
5. In cases of doubt or where clause 6 of the Ethics code applies the strategy
may be submitted to the Research Ethics Committee for approval.
6. Supervisors must monitor strategies and ensure that they are carried out
obtaining the agreement of a tutor to information sheets and
questionnaires and approval of the committee if appropriate.

Postgraduate Research Degrees:
1. Where a Director of Studies considers there to be an ethical issue in
relation to a Research Degree Proposals then on submission to the
Research Degrees Board Officer for consideration by the Board the
Proposal should be marked for consideration by the Research Ethics
Committee.
2. The proposal will be considered by both Committees and will be returned
by the Research Degrees Board Officer approved or marked for
amendments or conditions by one or both of the committees.
3. This procedure does not exclude a proposal being submitted to the
Research Ethics Committee directly by reason of the Terms of Reference of
the committee, for example in cases of doubt or where clause 6 of the
Ethics code applies the strategy should be submitted to the Research
Ethics Committee for approval unless the committee are submitting the
project for approval to an NHS LREC.
4. The director of studies is responsible for ensuring that any conditions set
by the committee are met including re-ubmission for approval of a
particular strategy or approval where substantive new ethical issues
should arise in the course of the student's studies.
5. Guidance and training
14
Regular training sessions are offered under the auspices of the Research Ethics
Committee.
15