RESEARCH ETHICS

1. Definition of concepts

1.1 Ethics
Ethics can be thought of as a set of rules by which individuals and societies maintain moral
standards in their lives (Matthews & Ross, 2010). It is what is done in accordance with
principles of conduct that are considered correct, especially those of a given profession or
group (Kumar, 2011). It is a system of moral principles and standards (Passer, 2014).

1.2 Research Ethics

It is the moral principles guiding research, from its inception through to completion and
publication of results and beyond (Matthews & Ross, 2010). It is professional practice
undertaken in accordance with the principles of accepted codes of conduct for a given
profession or group (Kumar, 2011). Ethics defines what is or is not legitimate to do or what
“moral” research procedure involves (Neuman, 2014).

2. Stakeholders in research
There are many stakeholders in research, whether it is quantitative or qualitative. It is
important to look at ethical issues in relation to each of them. The various stakeholders in a
research activity are the research participants or subjects; the researcher; and the funding
body.

2.1 Ethical issues to consider concerning research participants

2.1.1 Preserving anonymity

Anonymity ensures that a person remains nameless and unidentifiable. It is important to take
any precautions that are necessary to protect the identity of the people who take part in your
research. Thus researchers commonly use pseudonyms to prevent research participants from
being individually identifiable.

2.1.2 Preserving confidentiality

Confidentiality means that the researcher holds the data in confidence and keeps it from
public consumption. A researcher may provide one without the other (confidentiality and

Page 1 of 6
anonymity), but they usually go together. Having granted anonymity to the research
participants, the researcher must be prepared to protect their identity and any information that
arises from their participation in the research. This is what we mean when we assure people
of confidentiality. Any information or data collected from respondents must be managed and
handled carefully to safeguard confidentiality during and after completion of the research.
Therefore, data must be stored in such a way that research participants‟ names are not
available to others, unless they are staffs who are responsible to the researcher. One method
for preserving the confidentiality of research participants is to utilize unique identification
numbers or codes.

2.1.3 Collecting information

One could ask: why should a respondent give any information to a researcher? What right
does a researcher have to knock at someone‟s door or to send out a questionnaire? Is it ethical
to disturb an individual, even if you ask permission before asking questions? Why should a
person give you his/her time? Your request for information may create anxiety or put
pressure on a respondent. Is this ethical?

2.1.4 Obtaining voluntary and informed consent

A research project must be explained to potential participants in some way prior to their
involvement. The researcher must decide who will provide the explanation (this is usually
carried out by the researcher himself or herself) and when this will occur (generally, at the
beginning of the research project). In most cases, only a summary of the essential aspects of
the project needs to be known before agreeing to participate. The only circumstance in which
an explanation would not be provided is when ignorance of the purpose of the research is
essential to its success. They include:
a)Consent should be freely given. It is not acceptable to coerce people into participating.
This can be an issue of power; maybe people will want to please you by helping or maybe
they find you so scary that they are frightened to refuse! When you are thinking about
recruiting your sample, you need to consider how you will encourage people to participate
without coercing them.
b)You must provide clear, adequate information. Make sure people understand what they
are consenting to. People who are going to be part of your study deserve your respect and
consideration. Most likely they will be giving up their time without compensation. The

Page 2 of 6
reasons for this can be complex, but could be that they feel that your project is interesting and
worthwhile or that they think that you are worth some of their time. For Instance:
i) What’s in it for them? Often, this will be the satisfaction that they have helped someone‟s
research, but sometimes it will be more complex (they might have a strong personal
involvement in the topic, for example). Sometimes, research participants are paid or rewarded
for their participation; if your project wants to do that, then you will need to find funding and
decide whether the reward should be in cash or, perhaps, in something like gift vouchers
(paying participants is a bit of a minefield and can have important implications such as
income tax liability or an effect on someone‟s benefit payments).
ii)Why you are doing this research? A clear explanation and justification here will often
encourage people to participate, particularly if they feel that your work will be valuable to
them or their social group.
iii)What the practical implications are for them? Will they, for example, be asked to give up
a lot of time? Or maybe to do complicated mental exercises? Or perhaps to meet other people
in a focus group?
iv)Participation is voluntary and they have the right to withdraw at any time. It can be
really frustrating if people choose to exercise this right, especially if your sample is small, but
it is important to understand that there can be no penalty for this, your participant is simply
deciding to withdraw their consent. You need to consider in the design stage of your research
what you will do with any data collected up to the time that someone withdraws.
v)Are there any risks? Your research participants need to know if there are any risks from
their participation in your work.
vi) What you will do with the data? People need to know what you plan to do with the
information that you collect about them.
vii)What authority you have? Often, people will want to know what „authority‟ you have to
undertake this research. Most ethical approval processes will require you to have a „sponsor‟
who vouches for your reliability (for students, this will usually be your department, tutor or
supervisor). Participants should also know how to contact you and your sponsor.
c) Respondents must be able to give informed consent. There are times when you may need
to know that your respondents are able to give informed consent. Mostly, students should not
expect this to be a big issue, but you should be aware that some individuals are not
considered competent to give consent, usually because it is thought that they are unable to
understand the implications of doing so.

Page 3 of 6
2.1.5 Seeking sensitive information
Information sought can pose an ethical dilemma in research. Certain types of information can
be regarded as sensitive or confidential by some people and thus an invasion of privacy.
Asking for this information may upset or embarrass a respondent. However, if you do not ask
for the information, it may not be possible to pursue your interest in the area and contribute to
the existing body of knowledge.

2.1.6 Possibility of causing harm

When you collect data from respondents or involve subjects in an experiment, you need to
examine carefully whether their involvement is likely to harm them in any way. If it is, you
must make sure that the risk is minimal. They include:
a) Physical harm - Physical harm that may arise through the process of actually doing the
research is the most readily identifiable type of harm for a researcher to perceive and
therefore bought to be the easiest to protect against. In terms of physical harm, a researcher
should make every effort to identify the basic safety risks associated with her or his research.
Researchers most definitely ought to refrain from any research where physical harm is central
to the project.
b)Psychological harm - Researchers may place people in stressful, embarrassing, and
anxiety-producing situations without fully appraising them of this likelihood. Placing
research participants in such stressful situations may be considered harmful in some eyes.
c) Harm through publication - The SRA‟s statement of Ethical Guidelines (SRA 2003,
p.17) recognises that „all information ... is subject to misuse and no information is devoid of
possible harm to one interest or another‟. For example, a particular district may be negatively
stereotyped by an enquiry that finds that it contains a very high incidence of crime.
d) Harm to the researcher - While researchers need to pay due attention to protecting their
research participants from harm, it is important to remember that the course of research can
place the researchers themselves in harmful situations.
e) Harm to the research profession - Another aspect of harm that needs to be considered is
the harmful implications that the conduct of research may have on one‟s own profession
itself. All researchers ought to be aware of the obligations that they have to their fellow
researchers. If the process of the research is found to be objectionable or the publication of
research is held to be damaging, then future research is likely to be denied.

Page 4 of 6
2.2 Ethical issues to consider relating to the researcher

2.2.1 Avoiding bias

Bias on the part of the researcher is unethical. Bias is different from subjectivity.
Subjectivity, as mentioned earlier, is related to your educational background, training and
competence in research, and your philosophical perspective. Bias is a deliberate attempt
either to hide what you have found in your study, or to highlight something
disproportionately to its true existence. It is absolutely unethical to introduce bias into a
research activity. If you are unable to control your bias, you should not be engaging in the
research. Remember, it is the bias that is unethical and not the subjectivity.

2.2.2 Provision or deprivation of a treatment

Both the provision and deprivation of a treatment may pose an ethical dilemma for you as a
researcher. When testing an intervention or a treatment, a researcher usually adopts a control
experiment design. In such studies, is it ethical to provide a study population with an
intervention or treatment that has not yet been conclusively proven effective or beneficial?
But if you do not test a treatment/intervention, how can you prove or disprove its
effectiveness or benefits?

2.2.3 Using inappropriate research methodology

A researcher has an obligation to use appropriate methodology, within his/her knowledge
base, in conducting a study. It is unethical to use deliberately a method or procedure you
know to be inappropriate to prove or disprove something that you want to, such as by
selecting a highly biased sample, using an invalid instrument or by drawing wrong
conclusions.

2.2.4 Incorrect reporting

To report the findings in a way that changes or slants them to serve your own or someone
else‟s interest is unethical. Correct and unbiased reporting of the findings are important
characteristics of ethical research practice.

2.2.5 Inappropriate use of the information

How will the information obtained from respondents be used by the researcher? The use of
information in a way that directly or indirectly affects respondents adversely is unethical. Can

Page 5 of 6
information be used adversely to affect the study population? If so, how can the study
population be protected?

2.3 Ethical issues regarding the sponsoring organization

2.3.1 Restrictions imposed by the sponsoring organisation

Most research in the social sciences is carried out using funds provided by sponsoring
organisations for a specific purpose. The funds may be given to develop a programme or
evaluate it; to examine its effectiveness and efficiency; to study the impact of a policy; to test
a product; to study the behavior of a group or community; or to study a phenomenon, issue or
attitude.

2.3.2 Misuse of information

How is the sponsoring body going to use the information? How is this likely to affect the
study population? Sometimes sponsoring organisations use research as a pretext for obtaining
management‟s agenda. It is unethical to let your research be used as a reason for justifying
management decisions when the research findings do not support them. However, it is
recognised that it may be extremely difficult or even impossible for a researcher to prevent
this from happening.

References

Kumar, R. (2011). Research Methodology : A step-by-step guide for beginners (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications Inc.

Matthews, B., & Ross, L. (2010). Research Methods : A Practical Guide for the Social
Sciences. London: Pearson Education Limited.

Neuman, W. L. (2014). Social Research Methods : Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches

(7th ed.). London, UK: Pearson Education Limited.

Passer, M. W. (2014). Research Methods : Concepts and Connections. New York, NY:
Worth Publishers.

Page 6 of 6