JMC-REC_ERA3

RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE (REC)

Control No.: _________

Ethics Research Protocol Assessment Form

Submission Date: Application Resubmission

Research Title Protocol: Perception of Generation Z towards ROTC Program in selected schools
in Davao City

Name of Researchers: Montilla, Margareth Anne C.

Student/s Morales, Sane Earl A.

Faculty Pacatang, Valjim G.

Staff Suson, Rio Jane F.

Non-JMC Tabo-tabo, Jamesryl C.

Protocol Number: Contact Number: 09053948405

09303420801
Course/Major: Bachelor of Science of Criminology
(For faculty/staff: designation
and sponsor)

INSTRUCTIONS

To the Researcher/s: Below is an assessment list. Please check the appropriate boxes for the
indicated assessment points found in your research protocol.

To the Ethics Evaluate and confirm if the assessment points were all appropriately
Reviewer/s: addressed by the researcher in his/her research protocol. Lastly, finalize your
review by indicating your recommendation and signing it in the space provided.

ASSESSMENT POINTS To be answered by To be answered by

the researcher/s only the reviewer/s only

1. SCIENTIFIC DESIGN YES NO N/A YES NO N/A

1.1 Objectives ✔

Review of viability of expected output

1.2 Literature Review ✔

Review of results of previous animal/ human studies showing

known risks and benefits

1.3 Research Design ✔

Review of appropriateness of design in view of objectives

1.4 Sampling Design ✔

 JMC-REC_ERA3
RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE (REC)
Control No.: _________

Review of appropriateness of sampling methods and

techniques

1.5 Sample Size ✔

Review of justification of sample size

1.6 Data Analysis Plan ✔

Review of appropriateness of statistical and non-statistical

methods of data analysis

1.7 Inclusion Criteria ✔

Review of precision of criteria both for scientific merit and

safety concerns; and of equitable selection

1.8 Exclusion Criteria ✔

Review of criteria precision both for scientific merit and safety

concerns; and of justified exclusion

1.9 Withdrawal Criteria ✔

Review of criteria precision both for scientific merit and safety

concerns

2. CONDUCT OF STUDY YES NO N/A YES NO N/A

2.1 Specimen handling ✔

Review of specimen for storage, access, disposal, and terms

of use

2.2 Researcher/s Qualifications ✔

Qualification of the researcher/s to investigate and conduct the

said research

2.3 Duration ✔

Indicated and explained. Appropriateness of the length of

study.

2.4 Others ✔

Please Specify:
 JMC-REC_ERA3
RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE (REC)
Control No.: _________

3. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS YES NO N/A YES NO N/A

3.1 Voluntary Participations ✔

Willingness of human participants to be involved in the

investigation after knowing the purpose of the study

3.2 Privacy and Confidentiality ✔

Appropriateness of measures in securing the protection,

privacy and confidentiality of the participants

3.3 Informed Consent Process ✔

Review of application of the principle of respect for persons,

who may solicit consent, how and when it will be done

3.4 Recruitment ✔

Appropriateness and methods of identifying participants. How

will the consent be obtained?

3.5 Risks ✔

Review of level of risks and measures to mitigate these risks

(including physical, psychological, social, economic), including
plans for adverse event management

3.6 Benefits ✔

The potential to yield generalizable knowledge about the

participants’ condition/problem; non-material compensation to
participant (health education or other creative benefits)

3.7 Biosafety ✔

Sample collection, processing and proper disposal of infectious

and or any biological hazards

4. OTHER ETHICAL ISSUES YES NO N/A YES NO N/A

4.1 Plagiarism ✔

No trace or evidence of misrepresentation of someone else’s

work as his/her own (the investigator). Plagiarism software was
used to check the whole protocol.
 JMC-REC_ERA3
RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE (REC)
Control No.: _________

4.2 Fabrication ✔

No trace or evidence of intentional misrepresentation of

research results. No making up of data and/or results, or
purposefully putting forward conclusions that are not accurate.

4.3 Falsification ✔

No trace of purposefully manipulating and misrepresenting the

work to fit a model or theoretical expectation. No evidence of
over claiming or exaggerations.

4.4 Conflict of Interest (COI) ✔

No trace of COI, i.e. Disclosure of COI (COI is a set of

conditions in which a professional judgment concerning
primary interest such as the participants’ welfare or the validity
of the research tends to be influenced by a secondary interest.)

4.5 Focus Group Participant Identification ✔

Addressing the fact that the information discovered within the

group becomes common knowledge among those in
attendance; There must be a provision in the consent form
reminding participants to keep the information discussed with
in the group confidential.

4.6 Deceit ✔

Evidence that the benefit of misleading the respondents

outweigh any potential harm to them.

4.7 Observation ✔

Provisions to address an ethical issue when observing people

in public or quasipublic place, e.g. to have notices placed at
the entrance of the store indicating that the researchers will be
operating in this area at specific times.

4.8 Permission from Organizational/Location ✔

Has expressed getting a written permission from the

organization or institution in which the research or the data
collection will be conducted. When getting written permission,
the person to talk to must have the authority to give the
permission sought and that the activities are organized well in
advance.

4.9 Technology Issues ✔

 JMC-REC_ERA3
RESEARCH ETHICS COMMITTEE (REC)
Control No.: _________

Provisions as to the use of online sources, collection of data

online and how one interprets the information being gathered
in an online environment and are put into place and made into
understandable information for the participants.

4.10 Authorship ✔

Provisions on authorship must be made clear, e.g. authorship

qualifications, i.e. authorship credit should be based only on
substantial contributions to conception and design, or
acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data;
drafting the article or revising it critically for important
intellectual content; and final approval of the version to be
published.

RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR THE ETHICAL ASPECTS OF THE PROTOCOL:

APPROVED: AS IS

APPROVED: MINOR MODIFICATIONS MUST BE IMPLEMENTED (PENDING APPROVAL A)

APPROVED: MAJOR MODIFICATIONS MUST BE IMPLEMENTED (PENDING APPROVAL B)

DISAPPROVED

DEFERRED

Noted by:

MR. RONNIE DE LARA MENDOZA

Signature over printed name
Mentor/Adviser