When Protection Becomes Prevention: The Impact of the Ethics Review Process on Graduate Researchers

This article presents results from a national online survey on the unintended effects of research ethics board (REB) processes on research, teaching, and learning in the Social Sciences and Humanities across Canada ( N = 620). Focusing on student responses ( n = 93), key findings reveal how REB proceduralism, inconsistent risk assessments, and ethics creep disproportionately burden graduate students and restrict innovative, culturally responsive research. Students indicate that REB processes prioritize institutional liability over meaningful ethical engagement, often resulting in delays, emotional strain, and reduced academic motivation. Using DiMaggio and Powell’s framework of institutional isomorphism, the authors identify a paradox: while ethics processes are intended to be standardized, their implementation varies significantly across institutions. The authors recommend reducing barriers for low-risk studies, streamlining multi-institutional reviews, and enhancing REB transparency and cultural responsiveness, alongside offering student-informed strategies for reforming ethics review to better support early-career researchers.