Return of results from brazilian researches in psychology to research participants
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15448/1980-8623.2022.1.38216Keywords:
psychology, research ethics, research communication and disclosure, knowledge translation, impact validityAbstract
Although the return of results to participants is an important ethical issue in research, little is known on how Brazilian researchers in Psychology perform these practices. The objective of this article was to identify practices adopted by Brazilian researchers in Psychology to return research results to their respective participants. For this online cross-sectional study, we created a specific questionnaire, which was answered by 68 researchers in Psychology who were leaders of research groups listed in CNPq’s Research Groups Directory, for at least 1 year. Participants ranged from 32 to 73 years old (M = 49,8; SD= 11,5), 62% were women, and, in average, they have been working after doctorate for 14,3 years (SD = 9,6). 43% of participants reported frequently performing some form of devolution of results, mainly collective face-to-face practices, such as extension courses, trainings, or lectures. We conclude on the necessity of return of results practices in Psychology. When sharing results with people who were involved in researches, besides conforming with ethical principles, researchers may motivate participants to continue collaborating with research development.
Downloads
References
Anjos, K. F. dos, Boery, R. N. S. de O., Santos, V. C., & Boery, E. N. (2016). Devolutiva dos resultados de pesquisa desenvolvida com cuidadores familiares de idosos dependentes. Extensio: Revista Eletrônica de Extensão, 13(23), 99-111. https://doi.org/10.5007/1807-0221.2016v13n23p99
Cassepp-Borges, V. (2009). Devolução de dados por correio eletrônico: Uma alternativa para pesquisas quantitativas. Avaliação Psicológica, 8(1), 149-152. http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/pdf/avp/v8n1/v8n1a15.pdf
Conselho Nacional de Saúde. (2016). Resolução 510/2016. http://conselho.saude.gov.br/resolucoes/2016/Reso510.pdf
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (2013). Relatório de avaliação 2010-2012 – Trienal 2013. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=Y2FwZXMuZ292LmJyfHRyaWVuYWwt-MjAxM3xneDozYmEwNjgwYTJmMjE1Y2Y1
Creswell, J. W. (2010). Seleção de um projeto de pesquisa. In Creswell, J. W., Projeto de pesquisa: métodos qualitativo, quantitativo e misto (3. ed., pp. 25-47). Artmed.
Cross, D., Thomson, S., & Sinclair, A. (2017). Research in Brazil: A report for CAPES by Clarivate Analytics. Clarivate Analytics.
Granek, L., & Nakash, O. (2016). The impact of qualitative research on the “real world”: Knowledge translation as education, policy, clinical training, and clinical practice. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 56(4), 414-435. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022167815574623
Hagger-Johnson, G., Hegarty, P., Barker, M., & Richards, C. (2013). Public engagement, knowledge transfer, and impact validity. Journal of Social Issues, 69(4), 664–683. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12035
Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., De Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. (2015). The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, 520(7548), 429-431. https://doi.org/10.1038/520429a
Hohendorff, J. V., Postay, A. T., Habigzang, L. F., & Koller, S. H. (2017). Parceria com a rede de atendimento no estudo da violência sexual infantil. Revista da SPAGESP, 18(2), 143-156. http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/pdf/rspagesp/v18n2/v18n2a12.pdf
Knauth, D. R., & Meinerz, N. E. (2015). Reflexões acerca da devolução dos dados na pesquisa antropológica sobre saúde. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 20, 2659-2666. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-81232015209.04672015
Lordello, S. R., & Oliveira, M. C. S. L. (2012). Contribuições conceituais e metodológicas do modelo bioecológico para a compreensão do abuso sexual intrafamiliar. Psico, 43(2), 260-269. https://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/ojs/index.php/revistapsico/article/view/11703
Massey, S. G., & Barreras, R. E. (2013). Introducing “Impact Validity.” Journal of Social Issues, 69(4), 615-632. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12032
Patzlaff, R. G., & Peixoto, A. L. (2009). A pesquisa em etnobotânica e o retorno do conhecimento sistematizado à comunidade: Um assunto complexo. História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, 16(1), 237-246. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-59702009000100014
Pessanha, J., da Silva, C. O., & Rotenberg, L. (2013). Uma experiência de restituição de resultados em saúde do trabalhador. ECOS-Estudos Contemporâneos da Subjetividade, 3(1), 32-44. http://www.periodicoshumanas.uff.br/ecos/article/view/1124/817
Vinuto, J. (2014). A amostragem em bola de neve na pesquisa qualitativa: Um debate em aberto. Temáticas, 22(4), 203-220. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/cd8e/3ecb215bf9ea6468624149a343f8a1fa8456.pdf?_ga=2.73445466.913058980.1586440468-78208785.1586440468
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Psico
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright
The submission of originals to Psico implies the transfer by the authors of the right for publication. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication. If the authors wish to include the same data into another publication, they must cite Psico as the site of original publication.
Creative Commons License
Except where otherwise specified, material published in this journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, which allows unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is correctly cited.
