Research Ethics Involves The Application of Fundamental

Research ethics
Research ethics involves the application of fundamental ethical principles to a variety of topics
involving scientific research. These include the design and implementation of research involving human experimentation, animal experimentation, various aspects of academic scandal, including scientific
misconduct (such as fraud, fabrication of data and plagiarism), whistleblowing; regulation of research, etc. Research ethics is most developed as a concept in medical research. The key agreement here is the 1974 Declaration of Helsinki. The Nuremberg Code is a former agreement, but with many still important notes. Research in the social sciences presents 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 by principlism, 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
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 to participate 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.
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

Research Ethics Involves The Application of Fundamental

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Ethics Involves The Application of Fundamental

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Ethics Involves The Application of Fundamental

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research ethics

You might also like