Formal research-ethics committees in Canada now function as an industry, costing over thirty-five million dollars annually. The Seduction of Ethics argues that while ethics codes are alluring to the public, they fuel moral panic and increase demands for institutional accountability. Will C. van den Hoonaard explores the research-ethics review process itself by analysing the moral cosmology and practices of ethics committees regarding research and researchers. The Seduction of Ethics also investigates how researchers have tailored their approaches in response to technical demands — leading social science disciplines to resemble each other more closely and lose the richness of their research. Van den Hoonaard reveals an idiosyncratic and inconsistent world in which researchers employ particular strategies of avoidance or partial or full compliance as they seek approval from ethics committees.

Table of Contents:
Preface Acknowledgments Figures and Tables INTRODUCTION Premise of The Seduction of Ethics Ignorance and Scholarship The Scholarship on the Metabolism of Research-Ethics Review Conceptual Scheme Research Methods   Outline of The Seduction of Ethics AN ARCHEOLOGY OF RESEARCH-ETHICS REVIEW Outside the Ethics Regime: What Drives the System of Ethics Review?  Inside the System: Institutionalization of Research-Ethics Review THE CRITICISMS OF RESEARCH-ETHICS REVIEW Does the Ethics Regime Offer an Inappropriate Model for Social Science Research? Is Research Ethics Strangling Legitimate Research? Does Ethics Review Curtail Academic Freedom? Are Ethics Committees Bureaucracies? Does Ethics Review Develop and Maintain the Hegemony of Ethics Committees? Attempts to Negotiate the Two Worlds and Transcend the Criticisms: The Perspectives of Ethics Committees WHAT IS THE NORMATIVE ETHICS FRAMEWORK FOR SOCIAL RESEARCHERS?   The ‘Subject’ in International and National Research-Ethics Codes Bursting the Contemporary Ethics Bubble: Three Case Studies  STRUCTURE AND COMPOSITION OF RESEARCH-ETHICS COMMITTEES Ethics Committees as Part of the University Membership Jurisdictional Power and Independence Workload THE MORAL COSMOLOGY OF THE ETHICS-REVIEW WORLD About Themselves About Researchers About Research Participants PROCEDURAL ROUTINES: THE APPLICATION FORM AND THE CONSENT FORM The Application Form The Consent Form   THE MEETING: MAKING AGENDAS AND DECISIONS Attendance and Membership The Career of the Agenda Paradigms and Perspectives that Shape the Conversation about Ethics Making Decisions without Principles AN IDIOSYNCRATIC AND INCONSISTENTWORLD: COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN REBS AND RESEARCHERS Interpretation as the Basis of Idiosyncrasies and Inconsistencies Communications to Researchers/Language of (Dis)approval Content Language REB Communications inside the Larger Context of the Ethics Regime THE UNDERLIFE OF RESEARCH-ETHICS REVIEW: PREPARING AN APPLICATION The ‘Hurt Perspective’ The Researcher’s Moral Career Warming up (or Not) to Submitting the Proposal Preparing for the ‘News’ SECONDARY ADJUSTMENTS BY RESEARCHERS Reactions by Researchers to Ethics Reviews Applying Secondary Adjustments The Social Situation of Students in the Ethics-Review Process THE BELEAGUERED METHODS General Considerations about Redirecting Research The Declining Use of Particular Methods ON THEORY, TOPICS, AND FAVOURED  METHODS