1. Macquarie University
  2. Research
  3. Our research
  4. Research ethics and integrity
  5. Human ethics
  6. Resources and contacts

Access MQ forms, templates and guidance

Access Macquarie resources, specific forms, templates, guidance, policies and key contacts to support ethical human research at Macquarie University

In preparing your application, refer to the following resources:

Macquarie University Study Documentation: 

Participant Information and Consent Forms:
FoRA Support and System Guides: 
For more information about this system, what form to use, how to submit an application refer to the following FoRA user guides:

Macquarie University policies can be found at Policy Central, some examples provided below:

Guarding against fraudulent participation in human research

Online and remote recruitment has made many research projects quicker and  more accessible, but it has also increased the risk of fraudulent participation. This includes people who fabricate lived experience to meet eligibility criteria, participate multiple times, misrepresent or exaggerate their circumstances, disengage from the research, or automated "bot" responses generated at scale. These behaviours are most common where participation is remote and where reimbursement or incentives are offered.

Fraudulent participation is both a data integrity problem and a research ethics problem. It can compromise the validity of your findings, waste study resources and incentive budgets and, in studies involving people with genuine lived experience, it can crowd out and misrepresent the very communities your research is meant to serve. Anticipating and managing this risk is part of conducting research responsibly under the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research.

This page offers practical guidance on what to watch for and how to build safeguards into your project. It complements, and does not replace, your obligations under the National Statement and your approved ethics application.

Warning signs to look for

No single indicator confirms fraudulent participation. The signs below are prompts to look more closely and to cross-check against other information, not grounds to exclude a participant on their own. Genuine participants can share some of these characteristics, so use judgement and apply your approved inclusion and exclusion criteria consistently.

At registration and recruitment

Be alert to email addresses that follow a formulaic pattern (for example, name.surname followed by a string of numbers at a free email provider), and to details that do not match across a participant's registration, such as an inconsistent name, date of birth or other identifying information. Watch for multiple registrations sharing the same IP address, participants citing a recruitment channel you did not actually use, and unusually rapid responses to advertisements. Other flags include a strong or early focus on payment, very short emails and empty or minimal free-text responses, reluctance to provide professional or verifiable details, a location or country different from the one disclosed, and general inconsistencies or unexpected responses that do not fit the context of your study.

During interviews

In interviews, be cautious where multiple participants recount very similar stories, where a participant declines to turn their camera on, or gives vague answers and cannot elaborate when prompted. Reluctance to take part in a telephone interview, answers that "don't feel right," similarities not only in stories but in participants' voices, and interviews that run much shorter than expected can all warrant closer attention.

In surveys

Common survey indicators include straight-line responding (the same option selected down a column), very short completion times, contradictory answers within the same survey, empty free-text boxes, and high rates of non-response. Reviewing paradata such as timestamps and completion times alongside the responses themselves can help you identify these patterns.

Strategies to prevent and manage fraudulent participation

The most effective approach addresses fraud across all stages of your project: before recruitment, during data collection, and afterwards during analysis. Build these safeguards into your design and describe them in your ethics application so the reviewing committee understands how you will protect data integrity and participants.

Plan before you start

Prepare a clear research protocol (the HREA project description can help) that sets out how you will detect and respond to suspected fraudulent participation. Define specific inclusion and exclusion criteria and apply them consistently. Set out in your Participant Information Sheet the steps you may take if participation appears fraudulent, including how ineligible or fraudulent responses will be handled and how this affects any reimbursement. Being transparent with participants about these checks is both good practice and an ethics requirement.

Recruitment stage

Consider whether social media advertising is appropriate for your project as open social media recruitment is strongly associated with bot activity and mass fraudulent sign-ups; where possible, recruit through trusted networks, organisations or gatekeepers. Use single-use survey links so that each invitation can only be completed once, and, where feasible, verify eligibility before enrolment, for example through a short video call before participation or before any payment is released.

Data collection stage

Continue to check for the warning signs above as data arrives rather than only at the end. Where your design allows, use video calls to confirm identity and eligibility before remuneration, capture paradata (timestamps, completion times, IP information) where appropriate and permitted under your data management plan, and screen responses for duplicates and inconsistencies as you go.

Data analysis stage

Review your dataset for the patterns described above before analysis and document any decisions to retain or exclude responses along with your reasons. Keeping a clear record of how you identified and handled suspected fraudulent data supports the integrity and reproducibility of your findings.

A useful principle throughout is to verify consistently and early. It is far easier to prevent fraudulent participation at recruitment than to clean it out of your dataset afterwards.

Privacy and data considerations

Some detection methods, such as collecting IP addresses or requiring identity verification by video, involve handling additional personal information. Make sure any such measures are described in your ethics application and data management plan, are proportionate to the risk, and are consistent with the survey and data platforms approved for your project. Refer to the Research Data Management guidance when selecting platforms and planning how verification data will be stored and destroyed.

Getting help

If you are designing safeguards for a new project or need to amend an existing approval to add fraud-detection measures, the Human Research Ethics team can help. Book a one-on-one drop-in session via the Drop-in Sessions booking link, or contact the Secretariat at ethics.secretariat@mq.edu.au. Applications and amendments are submitted through the Forms for Research Applications (FoRA) system.

The following guidance is based on advice from the NHMRC on Targeted, Likely/Foreseeable and Incidental Participant Recruitment

Recruiting Members of Defined Populations: When Do Special Ethics Considerations Apply?

When planning your research, you need to consider whether members of defined populations (such as people with specific disabilities, migrants from particular countries, or other identifiable groups) are likely to be among your participants. This determines whether you need to address ethical considerations specific to those groups in your application.

Targeted or foreseeable recruitment occurs when your project specifically recruits a defined population, or when the setting and nature of your research makes their participation likely. In these cases, you must address the ethical considerations relevant to that group.

Incidental recruitment occurs when individuals from a defined population may participate simply because they happen to be present in the general population you are recruiting from, without being targeted. In these cases, group-specific ethical considerations may not need to be addressed.

How to apply this distinction

Use a project-specific, common-sense approach. If demographic or other factors mean a foreseeable portion of your participants will come from a defined population, address the relevant ethical considerations. If participation by members of that group is merely conceivable and numbers would be small, you may not need to do so.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities

This distinction is particularly important for research involving Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. If your research targets or is likely to involve Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander participants, specific guidelines apply. Consult the AH&MRC or AIATSIS HRECs for guidance on when and how these guidelines should be followed.

Important note

Both researchers and ethics review bodies share responsibility for correctly assessing whether recruitment is foreseeable or incidental. Incorrectly classifying recruitment as incidental may result in your application being returned for modification.

Depending on the age of the child and their capacity to understand the research, consent from children can be obtained in the following ways:

  • verbally, and recorded in writing, audio recording or video recording
  • using simple words or pictures to convey the information, in paper format or electronically
  • using a child-friendly version of a parent information and consent form, written in age-appropriate language.

The following reference article discussing the ethical issues concerning consenting children may also be useful:

Recruiting participants from schools (SERAP authorisation)

Research in New South Wales state schools requires approval from the NSW Department of Education and Communities. The SERAP application is no longer being accepting via SERAP online. The department has introduced a new SERAP application process effective from 30 January 2025. The changes are intended to deliver more timely decisions, reduce burden on researchers, and better support research aligned to Our Plan for NSW Public Education.

New SERAP application guidelines have been developed that clearly articulate the purpose of SERAP, its guiding principles and the updated steps involved in preparing and submitting SERAP applications.

To initiate a new SERAP application, please submit a SERAP Expression of Interest (EOI). Please visit Research in our NSW state schools.

All researchers submitting a SERAP form must obtain insurance sign-off from Macquarie University’s Risk and Assurance Unit. This sign-off is obtained via the ‘SERAP-Risk & Assurance Checklist’ form, which is available online in the Forms for Research Applications (FoRA) system.

Research in:

  • other states’ public schools or state education sites require approval from the relevant state government Department of Education eg if you want to conduct research involving QLD department sites and/or data, you must submit an application via the Queensland Education Research Inventory (QERI)
  • Catholic schools require approval from the relevant Catholic Education Office Diocese
  • independent/private schools require approval from the principal.

Download the guidance for Research involving the secondary use of data

Whether you can use existing data in your research depends on a range of legal and ethical factors. This guidance will help you prepare an HREC submission that addresses the requirements of the privacy legislation and the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2025. It covers the applicable legal framework, the information you'll need to provide about your dataset, the ethical context of the original data collection, and the options to consider when working with identifiable information, including how to apply for a waiver of consent.

Researchers should also familiarise themselves with the following guides, policies and legislation:

Social media platforms such as Reddit, X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn are used by millions of people worldwide and have become an increasingly valuable source of data for researchers investigating human behaviour, opinions, and interactions. However, the public, persistent, and far-reaching nature of social media means that research involving this data carries important ethical responsibilities that must be thoughtfully addressed.

That data is publicly accessible does not mean it is publicly available for research use. People post on social media for particular purposes and rarely with the expectation that their words will be collected, analysed, and reproduced in research. The collection of social media data originating from humans always requires ethics review, regardless of how open the source may appear.

This guidance is designed to help researchers understand their obligations in preparing an ethics application. Any considerations raised here that are relevant to your project, along with the steps you intend to take in response, should be clearly described in your application to the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC).

Download the guidance for Research using social media data.

From 10 December 2025, new legislation comes into effect which restricts social media access by children under the age of 16 in Australia. For guidance on the ethical use of social media to recruit or engage with research participants under 16 years, please refer to our guidance note - New Online Safety Laws: Research Ethics for Under-16s Social Media.

Download guidance for collecting demographic data.

This document outlines the wording we would recommend for diversity demographic questions based on current expert advice. These could be included in data systems, forms and surveys. It may not be necessary to include all these questions – it is always important to consider why you are collecting data and how it will be used.

For more information on collecting, interpreting and acting on diversity data, contact:
This document provides guidance on ethical oversight to support researchers in navigating the unique challenges of autoethnography

Contact us

The Ethics Secretariat administers the Macquarie University Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) and the Subcommittees.

Ethics Secretariat

T: +61 (2) 9850 4430

T: +61 (2) 9850 4490

E: ethics.secretariat@mq.edu.au

HREC: Humanities and Social Sciences

T: +61 (2) 9850 7850

HREC: Medical Sciences

T: +61 (2) 9850 4459

All applications and amendments must be submitted online View resources about forms and managing your applications Projects must follow relevant policies, laws and guidelines.