Reserach Ethics

7/28/2019 Reserach Ethics

1/3

Research ethics

Research ethics involves the application of fundamentalethicalprinciples to a variety of topics

involvingscientific research. These include the design and implementation of research involvinghuman

experimentation,animal experimentation, various aspects ofacademic scandal, includingscientific

misconduct(such as fraud,fabrication of dataandplagiarism),whistleblowing; regulation of research, etc.

Research ethics is most developed as a concept inmedical research. The key agreement here is the

1974Declaration of Helsinki. TheNuremberg Codeis a former agreement, but with many still important notes.

Research in thesocial sciencespresents a different set of issues than those in medical research.

The scientific research enterprise is built on a foundation of trust. Scientists trust that the results reported by

others are valid. Society trusts that the results of research reflect an honest attempt by scientists to describe

the world accurately and without bias. But this trust will endure only if the scientific community devotes itself to

exemplifying and transmitting the values associated with ethical scientific conduct .[1]

There are many ethical issues to be taken into serious consideration for research. Sociologists need to be

aware of having the responsibility to secure the actual permission and interests of all those involved in the

study. They should not misuse any of the information discovered, and there should be a certain moral

responsibility maintained towards the participants. There is a duty to protect the rights of people in the study as

well as their privacy and sensitivity. The confidentiality of those involved in the observation must be carried out,

keeping their anonymity and privacy secure. As pointed out in the BSA for Sociology, all of these ethics must

be honoured unless there are other overriding reasons to do so - for example, any illegal or terrorist activity.

Research ethics in a medical context is dominated byprinciplism, an approach that has been criticised as being

decontextualised.[2]

Research ethics is different throughout different types of educational communities. Every community has its

own set of morals. In Anthropology[3]

Research ethics were formed in Anthropology to protect those who are being researched and to protect the

researcher from topics or events that may be unsafe or may make either party feel uncomfortable. It is a widely

guideline that Anthropologists use especially when doing ethnographic fieldwork.

Research informants participating in individual or group interviews as well as ethnographic fieldwork are often

required to sign an informed consent form which outlines the nature of the project. Informants are typically

assured anonymity and will be referrd to using pseudonyms. There is however growing recognition that these

formal measures are insufficient and do not necessarily warrant a research project 'ethical'. Research with

people should therefore not be based solely on dominant and de-contextualised understandings of ethics, but
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethicalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethicalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethicalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_researchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_researchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_researchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_scandalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_scandalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_scandalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_misconducthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_misconducthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_misconducthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_misconducthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabrication_(science)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabrication_(science)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabrication_(science)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblowinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblowinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblowinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_researchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_researchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_researchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Helsinkihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Helsinkihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Helsinkihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Codehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Codehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Codehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_research_in_social_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_research_in_social_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_research_in_social_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principlismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principlismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principlismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principlismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_research_in_social_sciencehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Codehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_Helsinkihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_researchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblowinghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarismhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabrication_(science)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_misconducthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_misconducthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_scandalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_experimentationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_researchhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical


2/3

should be negotiated reflexively and through dialogue with participants as a way to bridge global and local

understandings of research ethics.[4]

In Canada, there are many different types of research ethic boards that approve applications for research

projects. The most common document that Canadian Universities follow is the Tri-Council Policy Statement.

However, there are other types of documents geared towards different educational aspects such as: biology,

clinical practices, bio-technics and even stem cell research. The Tri-Council is actually the top three

government grant agencies in Canada. If one was to do research in Canada and apply for funds, their project

would have to be approved by the Tri-Council.

Furthermore, it is the researchers ethical responsibility to not harm the humans or animals they are studying,

they also have a responsibility to science, the public as well as to future students.

Key issues

In terms of research publications, a number of key issues include and are not restricted to:[5]

Honesty. Honesty and integrity is a duty of each author and person, expert-reviewer and member of journal

editorial boards.

Review process. The peer-review process contributes to the quality control and it is an essential step to

ascertain the standing and originality of the research.[6]

Ethical standards. Recent journal editorials presented some experience of unscrupulous activities.[7][8]

Authorship. Who may claim a right to authorship?[5] In which order should the authors be listed?

THE CONSENT PROCESS

Introduction

This chapter sets out the ethical requirements for consent in research involving humans. Throughout this

Policy, the term consent means free, informed and ongoing consent. For the purpose of this Policy, free

and voluntary are used interchangeably.

Respect for Persons implies that individuals who participate in research should do so voluntarily, understanding

the purpose of the research, and its risks and potential benefits, as fully as reasonably possible. Where a

person has the capacity to understand this information, and the ability to act on it voluntarily, the decision toparticipate is generally seen as an expression of autonomy. The Policy refers to the process of seeking consent

from prospective participants, which may result in either agreement or refusal to participate. This process is

meant to emphasize Respect for Persons. Under no circumstances may researchers proceed to conduct

research with anyone who has refused to participate. Subject to exceptions set out in this Policy, consent must

be obtained from participants prior to the conduct of research.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-Chanson2008-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-Chanson2007-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-Mavinic2006-7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-Chanson2008-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-Chanson2008-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-Mavinic2006-7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-Mavinic2006-7http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-Chanson2007-6http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-Chanson2008-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_ethics#cite_note-4


3/3

Equally, Respect for Persons implies that those who lack the capacity to decide for themselves should

nevertheless have the opportunity to participate in research that may be of benefit to themselves or others.

Authorized third parties acting on behalf of these individuals decide whether participation would be appropriate.

For the purposes of this Policy, the term authorized third party (also known as authorized third party decision

makers) refers to any person with the necessary legal authority to make decisions on behalf of an individual

who lacks the capacity to consent to participate or to continue to participate in a particular research project.

These decisions involve considerations of Concern for Welfare and Justice.

Certain types of research require alternate processes for seeking consent. These are also described in this

chapter. Where elements of the consent process may need to be adapted to the requirements of a particular

research project, the research ethics board (REB) can play an educational and consultative role in determining

the appropriate process for seeking and maintaining consent.

The head of the research team, also known as the principal investigator, is responsible for ensuring that the

consent process is followed. This person is also responsible for the actions of any member of the research

team involved in the consent process.

In addition to this Policy, researchers are responsible for ensuring that all applicable legal and regulatory

requirements with respect to consent are met. In some circumstances, researchers may have further legal

obligations that may be determined in part by the nature of the research and the jurisdiction in which the

research is being conducted.1
http://www.ethics.gc.ca/eng/policy-politique/initiatives/tcps2-eptc2/chapter3-chapitre3/#_edn1http://www.ethics.gc.ca/eng/policy-politique/initiatives/tcps2-eptc2/chapter3-chapitre3/#_edn1

Documents

Reserach Ethics