The Impact of “Ethics Creep” on Research, Teaching and Learning in the Social Sciences and Humanities: A Survey of Canadian Researchers’ Experience with Research Ethics Boards

Designed to protect the dignity of research subjects, there is limited data on either the effectiveness of Research Ethics Boards or on the scope of the unintended effects of REB processes on core university functions of research, teaching and learning. This article shares results from an online survey on unintended effects, disseminated to postsecondary faculty and students in Social Sciences and Humanities across Canada (n = 620). Key findings include: 78% of respondents report REB processes deter them from undertaking research at all, including minimal risk research, and the prospect of REB review shapes research projects, particularly relating to equity or vulnerable populations. Seventy percent of faculty avoid assigning students research assignments with human subjects because of REB concerns, and 58% have advised graduate students to avoid research with primary data. The authors advocate for robust use of Tri-Council powers to develop feasible reforms to promote research and limit ethics creep.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie
Published
2026-04-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/cars.70034
Primary Topic
Academic integrity and plagiarism
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Impact of “Ethics Creep” on Research, Teaching and Learning in the Social Sciences and Humanities: A Survey of Canadian Researchers’ Experience with Research Ethics Boards

Kelly Gallagher‐Mackay, Karen Robson, Alexandra Pulchny
Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie
Academic integrity and plagiarism
article

The Impact of “Ethics Creep” on Research, Teaching and Learning in the Social Sciences and Humanities: A Survey of Canadian Researchers’ Experience with Research Ethics Boards

Kelly Gallagher‐Mackay, Karen Robson, Alexandra Pulchny
article en

Abstract

Designed to protect the dignity of research subjects, there is limited data on either the effectiveness of Research Ethics Boards or on the scope of the unintended effects of REB processes on core university functions of research, teaching and learning. This article shares results from an online survey on unintended effects, disseminated to postsecondary faculty and students in Social Sciences and Humanities across Canada (n = 620). Key findings include: 78% of respondents report REB processes deter them from undertaking research at all, including minimal risk research, and the prospect of REB review shapes research projects, particularly relating to equity or vulnerable populations. Seventy percent of faculty avoid assigning students research assignments with human subjects because of REB concerns, and 58% have advised graduate students to avoid research with primary data. The authors advocate for robust use of Tri-Council powers to develop feasible reforms to promote research and limit ethics creep.

Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologieVol. 63(2)
St. Thomas University (CA), Wilfrid Laurier University (CA), McMaster University (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Academic integrity and plagiarism
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.