UNIVERSITY OF KENT
FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
SCHOOL OF PSYCHOLOGY RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE
Terms of Reference and Membership
Terms of Reference
The Terms of Reference of the School of Psychology Research Ethics Committee have been
drawn up in accordance with the requirements of the University of Kent Research Ethics
(Human Participants) Committee, the Economic & Social Research Council (ESRC) Research
Ethics Framework, and the ethical guidelines from the British Psychology Society (BPS) (see
Appendix A).
1. To protect the dignity, rights and welfare of research participants.
2. To establish procedures for dealing with research projects involving human
participants including those for expedited review where the risk of harm to
participants and others is minimal (see Appendix B and Review checklist) and
procedures for dealing with appeals and complaints.
3. To consider research projects which involve human participants and which are
undertaken by staff, postgraduate and undergraduate students from the School of
Psychology, except where the researcher has answered ‘no’ to all the questions on
the ethics review checklist or where the project is to be considered by the NHS or the
Faculty research ethics committee (e.g., ESRC funded research).
4. To ensure that the research project meets the key ethical principles of the BPS and
ESRC

To assess grant applications that will be submitted to the ESRC, checking correct
consideration and handling of potential ethical problems

To approve access to the Psychology Research Participation Scheme (RPS) and
its pre-test

To monitor the conduct of research until the project is completed

To report to the University’s Research Ethics (Human Participants) Committee
including the provision of an annual monitoring report
Membership (8 members, quorum of 5)




Chair appointed for a maximum of 3 years (nominated by the Psychology HoS)
Six academic staff members appointed for a maximum of 3 years from a diversity of
Psychology sub-disciplines (nominated by the Psychology HoS)
Postgraduate representative appointed for 1 year
Secretary
Members of the Psychology REC are required to be familiar with ethical principles. Any REC
member who needs additional support in this should discuss the matter with the Head of
School or the chair of the Ethics Committee.
Members will be required to declare any conflict of interest with projects being considered and
will not be involved in any decision for projects undertaken by their post-graduate or undergraduate students.
The postgraduate representative will not be involved in the review process but will attend the
meetings to provide input about general procedural and strategic matters.
Meetings
Meetings will be held approximately five times a year. Additional meetings may be organized
as necessary.
UNIVERSITY OF KENT
FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
SCHOOL OF PSYCHOLOGY RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE
Procedures for Ethical Approval of Research Projects
1. All psychology researchers need to be aware of the ethical guidelines of the British
Psychology Society (BPS) and are required to work in agreement with the 1998 Data
Protection Act.
2. The Research Ethics Review checklist needs to be completed and submitted to the
Psychology Research Ethics Committee before any research project starts and before
any potential participants are approached.
3. When all questions from the ethics review checklist are answered with NO (signifying that
not more than minimal risk is involved), an ethics code will be sent to the applicant after
which the project can start. The ethics code will ensure registration of the research project
and will enable researchers to use the RPS system.
4. If one or more of the questions from the ethics review checklist is answered with YES, a
full application to the Psychology Research Ethics Committee is required. Researchers
intending to work with children or vulnerable adults will be required to submit a recent
criminal record check in addition.
5. Full applications require completion of the School’s Ethics application form plus
submission of all relevant project materials. Applications can be made for single studies
or a series of studies using similar protocols. Applications are made through the
Secretary of the Research Ethics Committee who needs to be sent a signed hard copy of
the application and an electronic copy.
6. Undergraduate and MSc students have to adhere to application deadlines (3 to 5 a
year) while PhD students, Research staff and Faculty are free to apply any time.
Applications that concern a procedural modification of a previously approved project will
receive priority status in the review process.
7. Each application will be reviewed by at least two members of the Research Ethics
Committee. The two members need to agree a decision. If no agreement is reached or
when further advice is required, all members of the Committee will be consulted and
involved in the decision process.
8. Outcomes of this review could be:
 Approval
 Approval with suggestions for improvement
 Approval subject to modifications that do not require resubmission
 Approval subject to modifications that need to be resubmitted
 Resubmission of application form and all materials
 Rejection
9. The applicant will be informed about the outcome of the review process within 2 weeks of
application. This will be done by one of the reviewers or, in complex cases, by the Chair
of the Ethics Committee.
10. When the application is approved, the applicant will receive an official approval
statement for the project concerned (plus ethics code) after which the project can start.
Approval expires after 2 years.
11. If the applicant is dissatisfied with the decision or comments made by the Committee,
s/he may refer it back to the Committee to reconsider. If the request is denied or the
Committee confirms its decision, the applicant will have the right of appeal to the
University’s Research Ethics (Human Participants) Committee. Such appeals must be
made in writing to the Secretary of the University Committee.
12. The Secretary will maintain a record of decisions or comments made for each project and
will retain this on file for 5 years.
13. Complaints about the conduct of research undertaken within the School should be made
to the Chair of the Psychology Research Ethics Committee. Incidents related to
approved research projects (e.g., accidental damage to equipment or first aid situations)
also should be notified to the Chair. Complaints and Incidents will be added to the project
files if and when they occur.
14. Researchers are required to report any substantial amendments to the protocol to the
Psychology Research Ethics Committee. Amendments need to be approved before
continuation of the project.
15. After having finished the research project, researchers are required to complete and
submit the End of Research Declaration.
16. The Chair of the Psychology Research Ethics Committee will be required to prepare
reports on behalf of the committee for submission to the University’s Research Ethics
(Human Participants) Committee.
APENDIX A
Summary of BPS Ethical Principles for conducting Research with Human Participants

GENERAL – the essential principle is that the investigation should be considered
from the standpoint of all participants; foreseeable threats to their psychological wellbeing, health, values or dignity should be eliminated. Researchers should respect
individual, cultural, and role differences including those involving age, disability,
education, ethnicity, gender, language, national origin, race, religion, sexual
orientation, and socio-economic status

CONSENT- whenever possible, the investigator should inform all participants of the
objectives of the investigation and all aspects of the research that might reasonably
be expected to influence willingness to participate. The investigator should provide
participants the opportunity to ask questions or clarification.
 Where research involves any persons under 16 years of age, consent should
be obtained from parents or from those in loco parentis
 Where real consent cannot be obtained from adults with impairments in
understanding or communication, wherever possible the investigator should
consult a person well-placed to appreciate the participant’s reaction, such as
a family member, and must obtain the disinterested approval of the research
from independent advisors

DECEPTION – The withholding of information or the misleading of participants is
unacceptable if the participants are likely to object or show unease once debriefed.
Participants should never be deliberately misled without extremely strong scientific or
medical justification

DEBRIEFING – When the data have been collected, the investigator should provide
the participants with any necessary information to complete their understanding of the
nature of the research. The investigator should discuss with the participants their
experience of the research in order to monitor any unforeseen negative effects or
misconceptions.

WITHDRAWAL FROM THE INVESTIGATION – at the onset of the investigation
investigators should make plain to participants their right to withdraw from the
research at any time, irrespective of whether or not payment or other inducement has
been offered. In light of experience of the investigation, or as a result of debriefing,
the participant has the right to withdraw retrospectively any consent given, and to
require that their own data, including recordings, be destroyed.

CONFIDENTIALITY – Information obtained about a participant during an investigation
is confidential unless otherwise agreed in advance. In the event that confidentiality
and/or anonymity cannot be guaranteed, the participant must be warned of this in
advance of agreeing to participate
 Confidentiality may be breached in exceptional circumstances under which
there appears sufficient evidence to raise concern about the physical safety
of participants or related others (e.g., their children). If applicable, this should
be mentioned before informed consent is obtained.

PROTECTION OF PARTICIPANTS – Investigators have a primary responsibility to
protect participants from physical and mental harm during the investigation. Normally,
the risk of harm must not be greater than in ordinary life. Where research procedures
might result in undesirable consequences for participants, the investigator has the
responsibility to detect and remove or correct these consequences.

OBSERVATIONAL RESEARCH – Studies based upon observation must respect the
privacy and psychological well-being of the individuals studied. Unless those
observed give their consent to being observed, observational research is only
acceptable in situations where those observed would expect to be observed by
strangers (i.e.., public places)

GIVING ADVICE – During research, an investigator may obtain evidence of
psychological or physical problems of which a participant is, apparently, unaware. In
such case, the investigator has the responsibility to inform the participant if the
investigator believes that by not doing so the participant’s future well-being may be
endangered. If the issue is serious and the investigator is not qualified to give
assistance, the appropriate source of professional advice should be recommended.
APPENDIX B
Research Involving more than Minimal Risk
The following research would normally be considered as involving more than minimal
risk:
 Research involving vulnerable groups – for example, children and young people
below the age of 16 years, those with a learning disability or cognitive impairment, or
individuals in a dependent or unequal relationship.
 Research involving questions related to topics that are both personal to the
respondent and potentially stigmatizing to answer – for example participants’ sexual
or illegal behaviour, their political beliefs, their attitudes towards violence, their
experienced abuse, their mental health, their medical treatments
 Research involving groups where permission of a gatekeeper is normally required for
initial access to members – for example, students at school, members of self-help
group, residents in a nursing home
 Research involving deception or which is conducted without participants’ full and
informed consent
 Research involving access to records of personal or confidential information,
including genetic, medical or other biological information, concerning identifiable
individuals.
 Research which would induce psychological stress, anxiety or humiliation, or cause
harm or negative consequences beyond the risks encountered in normal life.
 Research involving intrusive interventions – for example, the administration of drugs
or other substances, vigorous physical exercise, or techniques such as hypnotherapy.