Zachary Schrag would like to put the burden of proof for continuation of research ethics review in the Social Sciences on those who advocate for research ethics committees (RECs), and asks that we take the concerns that he raises seriously. I separate his concerns into a principled issue and a number of pragmatic issues. The principled issue concerns the justification for having research ethics committees; the pragmatic issues concern questions such as the effectiveness of review and the expertise of the committee members. I argue that RECs can be justified by their role in improving ethical practice and in reducing wrongs done to research participants. I propose a model of review for doing this, which I think would also address the pragmatic issues raised. I then offer an account of where the UK ethics review system is now and suggest three steps which could improve social science ethics review in the UK and move it in a perhaps more desirable direction.

Assuming that the purpose of research ethics review is to support the ethical conduct and dissemination of good quality research, a question can be raised concerning whether ethics review of research really improves the practice of researchers. Specifically, we might distinguish the activities that go on as part of the review process from those activities that constitute the data collection phase of the research, and ask under what conditions the former have a positive impact on the latter. Two different models of ethics review can be distinguished, term them ‘compliance’ and ‘reflexivity’-based reviews. Compliance-based models of review require researchers to show how they are complying with a given set of rules or protocols for research. Reflexivity-based models require researchers to articulate the ethical issues involved in their research and to explain and justify the way in which they plan to manage them. It is suggested here that there is reason to think that reflexivity-based models of ethics review are more likely to have a positive effect on the practice of social science research than compliance-based reviews.

<p>Flight delays represent a significant issue to airline profits and passenger satisfaction. Many factors can lead to a flight being delayed and/or canceled. The study evaluates flight delays, cancellations, and incident data with the goal of visualizing which airports, airlines, and cities, to visualize or states are experiencing the highest number of flight disruptions relative to others. Databases are commonly used for data analysis to allow pattern recognition and large data distribution and organization. The study will mainly serve the purpose of flight data retrieval, the compilation of data and database design, and finally output data visualizations.</p>

<p>Flight delays represent a significant issue to airline profits and passenger satisfaction. Many factors can lead to a flight being delayed and/or canceled. The study evaluates flight delays, cancellations, and incident data with the goal of visualizing which airports, airlines, and cities, to visualize or states are experiencing the highest number of flight disruptions relative to others. Databases are commonly used for data analysis to allow pattern recognition and large data distribution and organization. The study will mainly serve the purpose of flight data retrieval, the compilation of data and database design, and finally output data visualizations.</p>