@article{Anthony_2005, title={Consistency of Ethics Review}, volume={6}, url={https://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/527}, DOI={10.17169/fqs-6.1.527}, abstractNote={One would expect the ethical review of research proposals to be rather consistent from case to caseā€”in the same way that one expects the courts to consistently interpret the law. In this contribution, I report on the nightmarish situation where two nearly identical and in fact complementary action research studies to be conducted in parallel were evaluated quite differently. I conclude that someone, possibly the chair of a research ethics board, has to be accountable for the fair and consistent application of research ethics regulations. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs050153}, number={1}, journal={Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research}, author={Anthony, Robert}, year={2005}, month={Jan.} }