Ethics
​
Our Considerations
This page will showcase our ethical considerations from assessing risk, deciding how best to survey participants while minimizing harm to our project being ethically approved by the DTPEC.
There was a lot to consider.
In the beginning we knew we wanted our project to be based around a sensory room for the IADT campus. However we really had to work through the best way to build up this body of evidence with minimal risk to the student and at minimal cost.
This involved a lot of discussion over the first few weeks of class and led to the inclusion of a demonstration that did not focus on neurodivergent students but instead was open to all. This meant our survey data could not ask about any suspected or confirmed diagnosis.
Our survey data would solely focus on the room, and the experience of the room to avoid gaining to much information or distressing the participant. This way we could gather evidence in support of a sensory room on campus based on students wants without surveying a vulnerable population.
Do No Harm
The duty to take reasonable steps to avoid harming our participant, minimizing risk where it is foreseable and unavoidable.
Anonymity
Identity of participant should remain unknown and if known by the researcher identity should never be disclosed.
Autonomy
Participants should be given full information regarding the demonstraion, informed they can leave and request their data destroyed if they so choose to and full rights to know what we choose to do with the data.
Beneficience
Researcher should consider the welfare of the participants and when appropriate provide compensation.
Ethical Approval
Once we figured out our parameters for the study we applied for ethical approval. Because we knew exactly what we wanted to do and we already considered the ethics, the process was pretty straightforward.
Ethical approval was sought from the Department of Technology and Psychology Ethics Committee (DTPEC). The demonstration fits the criteria for a DTPEC amber route. The researchers submitted a completed amber route ethics form to the DTPEC supported by the appropriate documentation needed. The demonstration was amber route as the researchers were in direct contact with participants however vulnerable populations were excluded from the study and the research was not sensitive or distressing for the participants.
​
We eventually recieved ethical approval and we're on our way to designing our survey!
Information Sheets
Two surveys were created for this project (Pre-demo and Post Demo) and so two slightly different information sheets were created.
![](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/871576_b118ecd7388e4d818a35a524a457728d~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_353,h_448,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/871576_b118ecd7388e4d818a35a524a457728d~mv2.jpg)
![](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/871576_2ca1a45d1acb4731b5568325c0c51a33~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_391,h_447,al_c,q_85,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01,enc_avif,quality_auto/871576_2ca1a45d1acb4731b5568325c0c51a33~mv2.png)
Why two surveys?
The first survey focused gauging the students' ideas of sensory rooms, what they would want in a sensory room and if they would use a sensory room. Whereas the second survey focused on students opinion of the room, if they would use it again and if they wanted one on campus.
Before completing the surveys, participants were asked to write a unique code using their initials and numbers in order to maintain anonymity (ex. KC123) so if they choose to attend the demontration we could link their opinions back t the first survey. This was optionaly as with covid and also with people just not wanting to attend in the day, we felt this was a good way to build up evidence without pressuring the participant to join the demo that would be two weeks later.
Demo Day
Participants voluntarily participated in the demonstration and were reminded they had the right to withdraw at any stage. Participants were asked to fill out surveys after the demonstration but reminded that this was also optional.
​
Participants were provided snacks on the day for attending, lots of verbal feedback was given and researchers observed participants and how they interacted with the space.
​
Both surveys provided links to 3rd party organisations and the SensoryHaus gmail account to request their data or to ask any questions.
​
Check out our Room Design to see our room and our Feedback page to see what the participants had to say: