Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

 

Instructions:

1. Watch the Belmont Report video, as linked below

2. Review the Tuskegee Syphilis Study link, as linked below

Answer the following two prompts in your post.

· What aspect of this study was most impactful to you?  Why?

· Connect one ethical principle of human subjects research in the Belmont Report to the ethics (or, more accurately, lack thereof) of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study. For example, if you choose beneficence, explain what is meant by that per The Belmont Report, and explain how the ethical principle was violated by the experiment. Use information from the Tuskegee Syphilis Study CDC information and the Belmont Report video to support your answer.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

Research Ethics & Misconduct: What Researchers Need to Know
Last updated Jun 14, 2019 1
Ethics are the moral principles that a person must follow, irrespective of the place or time. Behaving ethically involves doing the right thing at the right time. Research ethics focus on the moral principles that researchers must follow in their respective fields of research.Why Do Ethics Matter?
Ethical decision making in academic research focuses on providing maximum benefits to the participants. Following ethical principles is indeed crucial for maintaining research integrity.

Research misconduct can have dire consequences. For instance, surgeon Paolo Macchiarini conducted experiments on patients without sound preclinical data. He worked on artificial transplantation of trachea within several patients, which turned out to be pathbreaking in medical history. However, it was all based on lies and fabricated data. Most of the patients who took part in his trial (seven of nine) died. He altered his published results to make it look as if his trachea transplant work was more successful than it really was. This was a severe consequence of the breach of research ethics.

The Nuremberg Code
One of the more famous ethical guidelines followed in medical research is the Nuremberg Code. Using the Nuremberg Code shows a commitment to respect research participants. The terrible experiments conducted by the Nazis during the Second World War inspired the formulation of the Nuremberg Code. These experiments often resulted in severe injury or death. In addition, none of the participants were allowed to decide upon whether or not they would like to participate. Many experiments were not done with any therapeutic aim in mind. The Nuremberg Code addresses all of these things.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Making Ethical Decisions
There are some core principles that guide ethical decision making. Firstly, you must be committed to ethical principles. This means choosing an ethical behavior even if it delays your work or means not getting published quickly in a prestigious journal.

Next, you must determine the authenticity of the facts. It is important to evaluate the credibility of the information before taking any decisions regarding the research. Create a list of actions you could take and evaluate the consequences of each one. Make a final choice that seeks to minimize harm and build trust. Ethical decision making also affects how you report research data and who can be considered an author.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Ethics governs not just the treatment provided to the research participants but also to the researchers. Any researcher who contributes substantially to a research project or paper needs to get credit. This holds true even if the researcher is a student. This is usually done by naming him/her as an author on the final paper. It is best to have this discussion before writing the research paper. That way, everyone involved can have their say. A person should not be included as an author because of his/her position in the institute. For example, the head of a department should only be included as one of the authors of the paper, if he/she did substantial work for the paper.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Researchers need to ensure that they do not wield undue influence over others. A professor may want to recruit his or her students for a study. In this case, he or she must make it clear that participation is voluntary, not compulsory. Moreover, no student must feel pressured to participate.

Research Participants Must Be Aware
Informed consent is a key principle of research ethics. It is important that the person who is invited to be part of the research understands both the benefits and the risks involved. They must have all the information that could affect their decision to participate. Each potential research participant should know:Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Why the study is being done, how long it will last, and what methods will be used
Whether they have the right to not participate or to leave the study at any time
What are the possible risks or benefits involved, if any
What are the limits of confidentiality (circumstances under which their identity might be revealed)
Whom they can contact for their queries.
Different Research Ethics for Different Disciplines
There are general codes of ethics for different disciplines. You can use the Declaration of Helsinki for biomedical research. There are even ethics guidelines for internet researchers and psychologists.

Regardless of the discipline, all ethical guidelines seek to maximize good and minimize ill effects. Research ethics, therefore, require that all participants provide voluntary informed consent. All research must seek to answer questions that will benefit humanity. The risks must be minimized as far as humanly possible.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Is there anything in this checklist that could help you refine your use of ethics? Can you suggest some more rules for research ethics that need to be followed? Share your thoughts with us in the comments below!

There are a number of ethical principles that should be taken into account when performing undergraduate and master’s level dissertation research. At the core, these ethical principles stress the need to (a) do good (known as beneficence) and (b) do no harm (known as non-malfeasance). In practice, these ethical principles mean that as a researcher, you need to: (a) obtain informed consent from potential research participants; (b) minimise the risk of harm to participants; (c) protect their anonymity and confidentiality; (d) avoid using deceptive practices; and (e) give participants the right to withdraw from your research. This article discusses these five ethical principles and their practical implications when carrying out dissertation research.

When you look at these five basic ethical principles, it may appear obvious that your dissertation should include these. However, there are many instances where it is not possible or desirable to obtain informed consent from research participants. Similarly, there may be instances where you seek permission from participants not to protect their anonymity. More often than not, such choices should reflect the research strategy that you adopt to guide your dissertation.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Broadly speaking, your dissertation research should not only aim to do good (i.e., beneficence), but also avoid doing any harm (i.e., non-malfeasance). Whilst ethical requirements in research can vary across countries, these are the basic principles of research ethics. This is important not only for ethical reasons, but also practical ones, since a failure to meet such basic principles may lead to your research being (a) criticised, potentially leading to a lower mark, and/or (b) rejected by your supervisor or Ethics Committee, costing you valuable time. In the sections that follow, we discuss the five of the main practical ethical principles that stem from these basic principles. Each of these basic principles of research ethics is discussed in turn:

PRINCIPLE ONE: Minimising the risk of harm
PRINCIPLE TWO: Obtaining informed consent
PRINCIPLE THREE: Protecting anonymity and confidentiality
PRINCIPLE FOUR: Avoiding deceptive practices
PRINCIPLE FIVE: Providing the right to withdraw
PRINCIPLE ONE
Minimising the risk of harm
Dissertation research should not harm participants. Where there is the possibility that participants could be harmed or put in a position of discomfort, there must be strong justifications for this. Such scenarios will also require (a) additional planning to illustrate how participant harm (or discomfort) will be reduced, (b) informed consent, and (c) detailed debriefing.

There are a number of types of harm that participants can be subjected to. These include:

Physical harm to participants.

Psychological distress and discomfort.

Social disadvantage.

Harm to participants? financial status.

An invasion of participants? privacy and anonymity.

Typically, it is not harm that we need to think about since a researcher does not intentionally go out to cause harm. Rather, it is the risk of harm that you should try to minimise. In order to minimising the risk of harm you should think about:

Obtaining informed consent from participants.

Protecting the anonymity and confidentiality of participants.

Avoiding deceptive practices when designing your research.

Providing participants with the right to withdraw from your research at any time.

We discuss each of these ethical principles in the sections that follow, explaining (a) what they mean and (b) instances where they should (and should not) be followed.

PRINCIPLE TWO
Obtaining informed consent
One of the foundations of research ethics is the idea of informed consent. Simply put, informed consent means that participants should understand that (a) they are taking part in research and (b) what the research requires of them. Such information may include the purpose of the research, the methods being used, the possible outcomes of the research, as well as associated demands, discomforts, inconveniences and risks that the participants may face. Whilst is it not possible to know exactly what information a potential participant would (or would not) want to know, you should aim not to leave out any material information; that is, information that you feel would influence whether consent would (or would not) be granted.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Another component of informed consent is the principle that participants should be volunteers, taking part without having been coerced and deceived. Where informed consent cannot be obtained from participants, you must explain why this is the case. You should also be aware that there are instances informed consent is not necessarily needed or needs to be relaxed. These include certain educational, organisational and naturalistic research settings. We discuss these in more detail under the section: Avoiding deceptive practices.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

PRINCIPLE THREE
Protecting anonymity and confidentiality
Protecting the anonymity and confidentiality of research participants is another practical component of research ethics. After all, participants will typically only be willing to volunteer information, especially information of a private or sensitive nature, if the researcher agrees to hold such information in confidence. Whilst it is possible that research participants may be hurt in some way if the data collection methods used are somehow insensitive, there is perhaps a greater danger that harm can be caused once data has been collected. This occurs when data is not treated confidentially, whether in terms of the storage of data, its analysis, or during the publication process (i.e., when submitting your dissertation to be marked). However, this does not mean that all data collected from research participants needs to be kept confidential or anonymous. It may be possible to disclose the identity and views of individuals at various stages of the research process (from data collection through to publication of your dissertation). Nonetheless, permissions should be sought before such confidential information is disclosed.

An alternative is to remove identifiers (e.g., vernacular terms, names, geographical cues, etc.) or provide proxies when writing up. However, such a stripping of identifiable information may not always be possible to anticipate at the outset of your dissertation when thinking about issues of research ethics. This is not only a consideration for dissertations following a qualitative research design, but also a quantitative research design [for more information, see the article: Research strategy and research ethics].

For example:
Imagine that your dissertation used a quantitative research design and a survey as your main research method. In the process of analysing your data, it is possible that when examining relationships between variables (i.e., questions in your survey), a person’s identity and responses could be inferred. For instance, imagine that you were comparing responses amongst employees within an organisation based on specific age groups. There may only be a small group (or just one employee) within a particular age group (e.g., over 70 years old), which could enable others to identify the responses of this individual (or small group of employees).Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Therefore, you need to consider ways of overcoming such problems, such as: (a) aggregating data in tables and (b) setting rules that ensure a minimum number of units are present before data/information can be presented.

A further alternative is to seek permission for access to data and analysis to be restricted to the published material, perhaps only allowing it to be viewed by those individuals marking your work. If the work is later published, adjustments would then need to be made to protect the confidentiality of participants.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

There are also a wide range of potential legal protections that may affect what research you can and cannot perform, how you must treated the data of research participants, and so forth. In other words, you don?t simply have a duty to protect the data you collect from participants; you may also have (in some cases) a legal responsibility to do so. Since this varies from country-to-country, you should ask your dissertation supervisor or Ethics Committee for advice (or a legal professional).Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

PRINCIPLE FOUR
Avoiding deceptive practices
At first sight, deceptive practices fly in the face of informed consent. After all, how can participants know (a) that they are taking part in research and (b) what the research requires of them if they are being deceived? This is part of what makes the use of deceptive practices controversial. For this reason, in most circumstances, dissertation research should avoid any kinds of deceptive practices. However, this is not always the case.

Deception is sometimes a necessary component of covert research, which can be justified in some cases. Covert research reflects research where (a) the identity of the observer and/or (b) the purpose of the research is not known to participants. Cases where you may choose to engage in covert research may include instances where:

It is not feasible to let everyone in a particular research setting know what you are doing.

Overt observation or knowledge of the purpose of the research may alter the particular phenomenon that is being studied.

Let’s take each of these in turn:

It is not feasible to let everyone in a particular research setting know what you are doing

By feasibility, we are not talking about the cost of doing research. Instead, we mean that it is not practically possible to let everyone in a particular research setting know what you are doing. This is most likely to be the case where research involves observation, rather than direct contact with participants, especially in a public or online setting. There are a number of obvious instances where this may be the case:

Observing what users are doing in an Internet chat room.

Observing individuals going about their business (e.g., shopping, going to work, etc.).

Clearly, in these cases, where individuals are coming and going, it may simply be impossible to let everyone known what you are doing. You may not be intentionally trying to engage in deceptive practices, but clearly participants are not giving you their informed consent.

Overt observation or knowledge of the purpose of the research may alter the particular phenomenon that is being studied

Where observations or a participants? knowledge of the true purpose of the research have the potential to alter the particular phenomenon that you are interested in, this is a major concern in terms of the quality of your findings.

Therefore, when you think about whether to engage in covert research and possibly deceptive practices, you should think about the extent to which this could be beneficial in your dissertation, not research in general; that is, everything from the research paradigm that guides your dissertation through to the data analysis techniques you choose affect issues of research ethics in your dissertation [see the article: Research strategy and research ethics].Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Imagine some of the following scenarios where covert research may be considered justifiable:

Scenario A

You are conducting a piece of research looking at prejudice. Whilst participants are given a questionnaire to complete that measures their prejudice, it is not obvious from the questions that this is the case. Furthermore, participants are not told that the research is about prejudice because it is felt that this could alter their responses. After all, few people would be happy if other people thought they were prejudice. As a result, if participants knew that this is the purpose of the study, they may well provide responses that they think will make them appear less prejudice.

Scenario B

You are interested in understanding the organisational culture in a single firm. You feel that observation would be an appropriate research method in such a naturalistic setting. However, you feel that if employees knew that you were monitoring them, they may behave in a different way. Therefore, you may have received permission to go undercover or provide a story to explain why you are there, which is not the truth.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Whilst such covert research and deceptive practices, especially where used intentionally, can be viewed as controversial, it can be argued that they have a place in research.

PRINCIPLE FIVE
Providing the right to withdraw
With the exception of those instances of covert observation where is not feasible to let everyone that is being observed know what you are doing, research participants should always have the right to withdraw from the research process. Furthermore, participants should have the right to withdraw at any stage in the research process. When a participant chooses to withdraw from the research process, they should not be pressured or coerced in any way to try and stop them from withdrawing.

If your supervisor and/or Ethics Committee expect you to complete an Ethics Consent Form, it is likely that you will have to let participants know that they have the right to withdraw at any time [see the article: Ethics consent form].Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Next Steps
Now that you have read these basic principles of research ethics, you may want to understand how the research strategy you have chosen affects your approach to research ethics [see the article: Research strategy and research ethics]. You will need to understand the impact of your research strategy on your approach to research ethics when writing up the Research Ethics section of your Research Strategy chapter (usually Chapter Three: Research Strategy).

The ideas and opinions expressed in this essay are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of the NIH, NIEHS, or US government.

ethic image decorative header
When most people think of ethics (or morals), they think of rules for distinguishing between right and wrong, such as the Golden Rule (“Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”), a code of professional conduct like the Hippocratic Oath (“First of all, do no harm”), a religious creed like the Ten Commandments (“Thou Shalt not kill…”), or a wise aphorisms like the sayings of Confucius. This is the most common way of defining “ethics”: norms for conduct that distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable behavior.

Most people learn ethical norms at home, at school, in church, or in other social settings. Although most people acquire their sense of right and wrong during childhood, moral development occurs throughout life and human beings pass through different stages of growth as they mature. Ethical norms are so ubiquitous that one might be tempted to regard them as simple commonsense. On the other hand, if morality were nothing more than commonsense, then why are there so many ethical disputes and issues in our society?Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Alternatives to Animal Testing
test tubes on a tray decorrative image
Alternative test methods are methods that replace, reduce, or refine animal use in research and testing

Learn more about Environmental science Basics

One plausible explanation of these disagreements is that all people recognize some common ethical norms but interpret, apply, and balance them in different ways in light of their own values and life experiences. For example, two people could agree that murder is wrong but disagree about the morality of abortion because they have different understandings of what it means to be a human being.

Most societies also have legal rules that govern behavior, but ethical norms tend to be broader and more informal than laws. Although most societies use laws to enforce widely accepted moral standards and ethical and legal rules use similar concepts, ethics and law are not the same. An action may be legal but unethical or illegal but ethical. We can also use ethical concepts and principles to criticize, evaluate, propose, or interpret laws. Indeed, in the last century, many social reformers have urged citizens to disobey laws they regarded as immoral or unjust laws. Peaceful civil disobedience is an ethical way of protesting laws or expressing political viewpoints.

Another way of defining ‘ethics’ focuses on the disciplines that study standards of conduct, such as philosophy, theology, law, psychology, or sociology. For example, a “medical ethicist” is someone who studies ethical standards in medicine. One may also define ethics as a method, procedure, or perspective for deciding how to act and for analyzing complex problems and issues. For instance, in considering a complex issue like global warming, one may take an economic, ecological, political, or ethical perspective on the problem. While an economist might examine the cost and benefits of various policies related to global warming, an environmental ethicist could examine the ethical values and principles at stake.

See ethics in practice at NIEHS
Read latest updates in our monthly Global Environmental Health Newsletter

global environmental health
Many different disciplines, institutions, and professions have standards for behavior that suit their particular aims and goals. These standards also help members of the discipline to coordinate their actions or activities and to establish the public’s trust of the discipline. For instance, ethical standards govern conduct in medicine, law, engineering, and business. Ethical norms also serve the aims or goals of research and apply to people who conduct scientific research or other scholarly or creative activities. There is even a specialized discipline, research ethics, which studies these norms. See Glossary of Commonly Used Terms in Research Ethics.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

There are several reasons why it is important to adhere to ethical norms in research. First, norms promote the aims of research, such as knowledge, truth, and avoidance of error. For example, prohibitions against fabricating, falsifying, or misrepresenting research data promote the truth and minimize error.

Join an NIEHS Study
See how we put research Ethics to practice.

Visit Joinastudy.niehs.nih.govto see the various studies NIEHS perform.

join a study decorative image
Second, since research often involves a great deal of cooperation and coordination among many different people in different disciplines and institutions, ethical standards promote the values that are essential to collaborative work, such as trust, accountability, mutual respect, and fairness. For example, many ethical norms in research, such as guidelines for authorship, copyright and patenting policies, data sharing policies, and confidentiality rules in peer review, are designed to protect intellectual property interests while encouraging collaboration. Most researchers want to receive credit for their contributions and do not want to have their ideas stolen or disclosed prematurely.

Third, many of the ethical norms help to ensure that researchers can be held accountable to the public. For instance, federal policies on research misconduct, conflicts of interest, the human subjects protections, and animal care and use are necessary in order to make sure that researchers who are funded by public money can be held accountable to the public.

Fourth, ethical norms in research also help to build public support for research. People are more likely to fund a research project if they can trust the quality and integrity of research.

Finally, many of the norms of research promote a variety of other important moral and social values, such as social responsibility, human rights, animal welfare, compliance with the law, and public health and safety. Ethical lapses in research can significantly harm human and animal subjects, students, and the public. For example, a researcher who fabricates data in a clinical trial may harm or even kill patients, and a researcher who fails to abide by regulations and guidelines relating to radiation or biological safety may jeopardize his health and safety or the health and safety of staff and students.

Codes and Policies for Research Ethics
Given the importance of ethics for the conduct of research, it should come as no surprise that many different professional associations, government agencies, and universities have adopted specific codes, rules, and policies relating to research ethics. Many government agencies have ethics rules for funded researchers.

Ethical Issues in ResearchSee also: Writing a Research Proposal

Ethics are broadly the set of rules, written and unwritten, that govern our expectations of our own and others’ behaviour.

Effectively, they set out how we expect others to behave, and why. While there is broad agreement on some ethical values (for example, that murder is bad), there is also wide variation on how exactly these values should be interpreted in practice.

Research ethics are the set of ethics that govern how scientific and other research is performed at research institutions such as universities, and how it is disseminated.

This page explains more about research ethics, and how you can ensure that your research is compliant.

What are Research Ethics?
When most people think of research ethics, they think about issues that arise when research involves human or animal subjects.

While these issues are indeed a key part of research ethics, there are also wider issues about standards of conduct. These include the importance of publishing findings in a transparent way, not plagiarising others’ work, and not falsifying work.

The Importance of Research Ethics

Research ethics are important for a number of reasons.

They promote the aims of research, such as expanding knowledge.
They support the values required for collaborative work, such as mutual respect and fairness. This is essential because scientific research depends on collaboration between researchers and groups.
They mean that researchers can be held accountable for their actions. Many researchers are supported by public money, and regulations on conflicts of interest, misconduct, and research involving humans or animals are necessary to ensure that money is spent appropriately.
They ensure that the public can trust research. For people to support and fund research, they have to be confident in it.
They support important social and moral values, such as the principle of doing no harm to others.
Source: Resnick, D. B. (2015) What is Ethics in Research and Why is it Important?

Codes of Ethics
Government agencies who fund or commission research often publish codes of conduct for researchers, or codes of ethics.

For example, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) both publish ethical codes. Some ethical codes may have the force of law behind them, while others may simply be advisable.

Be aware that even if you do nothing illegal, doing something unethical may end your research career.

Many or even most ethical codes cover the following areas:

Honesty and Integrity

This means that you need to report your research honestly, and that this applies to your methods (what you did), your data, your results, and whether you have previously published any of it. You should not make up any data, including extrapolating unreasonably from some of your results, or do anything which could be construed as trying to mislead anyone. It is better to undersell than over-exaggerate your findings.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

When working with others, you should always keep to any agreements, and act sincerely.

Objectivity

You should aim to avoid bias in any aspect of your research, including design, data analysis, interpretation, and peer review. For example, you should never recommend as a peer reviewer someone you know, or who you have worked with, and you should try to ensure that no groups are inadvertently excluded from your research. This also means that you need to disclose any personal or financial interests that may affect your research.

Carefulness

Take care in carrying out your research to avoid careless mistakes. You should also review your work carefully and critically to ensure that your results are credible. It is also important to keep full records of your research. If you are asked to act as a peer reviewer, you should take the time to do the job effectively and fully.

Openness

You should always be prepared to share your data and results, along with any new tools that you have developed, when you publish your findings, as this helps to further knowledge and advance science. You should also be open to criticism and new ideas.

Respect for Intellectual Property

You should never plagiarise, or copy, other people’s work and try to pass it off as your own. You should always ask for permission before using other people’s tools or methods, unpublished data or results. Not doing so is plagiarism. Obviously, you need to respect copyrights and patents, together with other forms of intellectual property, and always acknowledge contributions to your research. If in doubt, acknowledge, to avoid any risk of plagiarism.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Confidentiality

You should respect anything that has been provided in confidence. You should also follow guidelines on protection of sensitive information such as patient records.

Responsible Publication

You should publish to advance to state of research and knowledge, and not just to advance your career. This means, in essence, that you should not publish anything that is not new, or that duplicates someone else’s work.

Legality

You should always be aware of laws and regulations that govern your work, and be sure that you conform to them.

Animal Care

If you are using animals in your research, you should always be sure that your experiments are both necessary and well-designed. You should also show respect for the animals you are using, and make sure that they are properly cared for.

Human Subjects Protection

If your research involves people, you should make sure that you reduce any possible harm to the minimum, and maximise the benefits both to participants and other people.

This means, for example, that you should not expose people to more tests than are strictly necessary to fulfil your research aims. You should always respect human rights, including the right to privacy and autonomy. You may need to take particular care with vulnerable groups, which include, but are not limited to, children, older people, and those with learning difficulties.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Source: Resnick, D. B. (2015) What is Ethics in Research and Why is it Important? List adapted from Shamoo A and Resnik D. 2015. Responsible Conduct of Research, 3rd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press).

The Role of the Ethics Committee
Most universities have an ethics committee. This is required to scrutinise all research proposals, to ensure that they do not raise any ethical issues. This will generally include research for master’s and undergraduate degrees, although undergraduate research may be covered by a broader research proposal from your supervisor.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

There is likely to be a standard form to complete for ethical approval, which will cover who will be involved, how you will recruit your participants, and what steps you will take to ensure that they have provided informed consent.

There is an example form on our page Writing a Research Proposal, which also contains more detail about how to go about preparing a proposal.

The ethics committee’s role is to consider that what you are doing is appropriate and proportionate to your research aims.

If a research proposal raises ethical issues, the committee will ask the researcher to look again at the issue, and consider whether they could do it differently.

For example, if you are proposing to carry out a study on a particular disease, and you want to ask all your participants whether they are married and have any children, the committee may want to know why this is relevant. It may be relevant (for example, if you think the disease may be reduced by living in a family), in which case, you will need to justify this.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

The committee may also suggest alternative methods that they think are more suitable for the target group, or additional precautions that you should take.

You cannot start your research until you have been granted ethical approval, which will be granted formally, together with an approval number.

When you publish your research, whether as a thesis or in one or more journal articles, you will need to provide details of the ethical approval, including this number.

If you are unsure how to behave in a particular situation…
…and think you may have an ethical dilemma, then you should always seek advice before you act.

If you are a student, your supervisor should be happy to help and advise you. If necessary, they will be able to advise you about who else to ask.

As a researcher, you should consult more senior colleagues around, either at your own institution or others, who should be happy to help you.

After all, it is in everyone’s interests to promote research ethics, and support the integrity and reputation of research.

Abstract
Drawing on various national statements on the ethical conduct of research, the codes of ethics of professional associations and international agencies, and ethical guidelines in social research methods textbooks, this paper identifies current principles for ethical research involving humans and discusses their implications for impact assessment practice generally and social impact assessment specifically. The identified ethical principles include: respect for participants, informed consent, specific permission required for audio or video recording, voluntary participation and no coercion, participant right to withdraw, full disclosure of funding sources, no harm to participants, avoidance of undue intrusion, no use of deception, the presumption and preservation of anonymity, participant right to check and modify a transcript, confidentiality of personal matters, data protection, enabling participation, ethical governance, provision of grievance procedures, appropriateness of research methodology, and full reporting of methods. Topics such as a conflict of interest, moral hazard and duty of care are also considered. Also discussed are Indigenous peoples’ rights and their implications for ethical impact assessment processes.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Keywords:: ethics in practice, social research ethics, professional ethics, ethical social research, reflexive practice, code of ethics
Introduction: The need for competency in ethics
Ethical issues and dilemmas arise in all forms of professional practice. Academic research in various disciplines, especially in the social sciences, also encounters ethical issues. While there has been an increasing codification of research ethics and professional practice ethics with the establishment of institutional ethics committees, views about the ethical implications of various research methods and practices vary across disciplines and in different cultural settings (Castellano 2004; Hoeyer et al. 2005). For example, much concern has been expressed by social scientists about the dominance of biomedical thinking in research ethics discussions (Israel & Hay 2006; Shore 2007; Dyer & Demeritt 2009; Amon et al. 2012). Therefore, with evolving practice in impact assessment practice generally and social impact assessment (SIA) practice especially (Vanclay 2002, 2003a, 2004, 2006, 2012; Esteves & Vanclay 2009; João et al. 2011; Vanclay & Esteves 2011; Esteves et al. 2012; Franks & Vanclay 2013), it is appropriate that ongoing reconsideration be given to the topic of ethical practice and to the kinds of ethical issues that can arise (Howitt 2005; Baines & Taylor 2011; Fuggle 2012). This is especially the case because ethical issues in professional practice rarely have simple right and wrong answers (Guillemin & Gillam 2004). An active awareness of the ethical issues likely to be encountered is important for reflexive and professional practice (Fisher 2008).

A hallmark of professionalism is an ongoing discussion of ethical issues within the professional group (Jowell 1986; Savan 1989; Wolpe 2006; Zandvoort 2008). Jennings (2003) considers that there are five general goals of ethics education for practising professionals:

Stimulating and broadening the moral imagination – practitioners need to learn about ethics, to understand ethical issues, to gain an empathy for people, and to interpret contexts in moral terms.

Recognizing ethical issues – practitioners need to be aware of when and how ethical issues occur.

Developing analytical skills – practitioners need to learn the vocabulary of ethics and moral argument, and to develop skills in analysing and addressing ethical situations.

Eliciting a sense of moral obligation and responsibility – practitioners need to develop an understanding of their personal obligations and responsibilities.

Coping with moral ambiguity – practitioners need to be aware of and able to cope with situations in which moral principles are in conflict with each other and/or where there is no obvious moral choice. Decisions in these cases should be based not on personal preference or vested interest, but on reasoned moral argument. The potential for moral ambiguity also means that individual practitioners need to be able to negotiate ethical judgements with others and be able to defend their decisions and actions on moral grounds.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

This paper and its companion paper (Baines et al. 2013) seek to contribute to advancing these goals in the impact assessment field. While the companion paper discusses a range of ethical issues from the basis of the authors’ experiences of professional SIA practice, this first paper is relevant to all fields of impact assessment given that the principles of ethical human research are considered to apply to any research (i.e. data collection) process that involves human beings, whether humans are the subject of the research or only the providers of data. Thus, data collection for an (environmental) impact assessment that relies on asking people for opinions or information about biophysical issues would still normally be expected to comply with ethical research principles and procedures. The Australian national ethical research statement, for example, requires that its ethical principles be used in conjunction with any human research funded by any of the Australian government research funding agencies. Furthermore, it states that: ‘in addition, the National Statement sets national standards for use by any individual, institution or organisation conducting human research. This includes human research undertaken by governments, industry, private individuals, organisations, or networks of organisations’ (Australian Government 2007, p. 7). Social research ethics therefore potentially extend beyond SIA to all forms of impact assessment, and extend from academic to all organizational settings.

While academic research in many countries is clearly subject to the national generic and institution-specific requirements of the particular university in which the academic researcher resides, it is worth considering the extent to which research ethics might also apply outside the context of formal research institutions, to the professional practice settings in which most impact assessment professionals work. Although ethical research principles are sometimes used by institutions to protect the reputations of those institutions and to address risk considerations, nevertheless there is a legitimate, widely accepted, fundamental philosophical basis to the ethical principles. To that extent, these principles also apply to all practitioners, irrespective of their institutional setting. Thus, good professional practice would mean complying with ethical research as generally understood.

This paper (i.e. part I of a two-part paper) identifies the currently accepted ethical principles that apply to research involving humans and reflects briefly on the extent to which they apply to impact assessment. The companion paper (Baines et al. 2013) considers specifically how the ethical principles apply to SIA practice, drawing on the practice perspective of the authors. This first paper starts with a discussion of ethics and professional practice, before considering a range of codes of ethical research and identifying the major ethical principles in those codes. A concluding section provides some reflections relating to improving ethical conduct in impact assessment generally.

Morality, ethics and ethical practice
Ethics, or moral philosophy, is a branch of philosophy that seeks to address questions of morality. Morality refers to beliefs or standards about concepts like good and bad, right and wrong (Jennings 2003). When used as the basis for guiding individual and collective behaviour, ethics takes on a normative function, helping individuals consider how they should behave from a moral perspective, in other words, what they ought to do. Applied or professional ethics deals with ethical questions in many fields of professional practice, and many journals have been established, including: Bioethics; Journal of Business Ethics; Journal of Clinical Ethics; Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics; Journal of Medical Ethics; Nanoethics; and Science & Engineering Ethics. In addition, the mainstream journals of the professions frequently discuss ethical issues. Ethics apply to all aspects of personal and organizational practice and are therefore relevant to individuals, small firms, large corporations, government and non-government organizations, and to professions as a whole.

The application of ethics in a professional context often takes the form of a written code, document or agreement that stipulates morally acceptable behaviour by individuals within an organization or profession. In medicine and health research, for example, the Helsinki Declaration (World Medical Association 2000) is the defining statement. The American Anthropological Association (2012), American Evaluation Association (2004), Association of American Geographers (2009), American Planning Association (1992), American Psychology Association (2010), American Sociological Association (1999) and their equivalent organizations in many other countries of the world all have their various Codes of Ethics. Most professional associations in most countries of the world, including the International Association for Impact Assessment (International Association for Impact Assessment 2009), have some form of a code of ethics – as stated before, consideration of ethical concerns is a defining feature of being a profession. An excellent entry point for links to codes of ethics is the CODEX website established at the University of Uppsala with the support of the Swedish Research Council (http://www.codex.uu.se/en/etik9.shtml). Another entry point is the Council of European Social Science Data Archives (http://www.cessda.org/sharing/rights/4/).

Rossouw (2002) provides a useful discussion of the various features requiring attention when organizations develop a code of ethics, including consideration of purpose, process, form, content and implementation. He notes that some codes put more emphasis on promoting good practice while others emphasize the avoidance of malpractice. Some are aspirational in character, setting out ideal behaviours, while others are more directional, setting out actual behavioural requirements. Some ethical codes are more concerned with the implications of an individual’s behaviour for their professional colleagues within an organization, while others focus more on the importance of maintaining the confidence of external parties such as the public, the courts, the state, or key stakeholders. Rossouw argues that, if the purpose of a code is to establish agreement about shared values between members of an organization, then a consensus-seeking process is required.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Professional practice and codes of ethics
In any jurisdiction, one can conceive of various intersecting sets of ethical codes and understandings. One sphere relates to the ethics of academic social science enquiry. Another sphere is associated with the ethics of professional practice where consultants make a living implementing social research methods in commercial contexts. Another relates to institutional guidelines of a government agency (the regulator or competent authority) or, in the few situations where they have them, the codes of conduct of the private sector commissioning party. Yet another sphere relates to the provision of expert advice in judicial or quasi-judicial situations where there are often specific legal requirements pertaining to the nature of evidence and disclosure of sources. Another sphere is the expectations of the affected population and/or of any significant subgroups within society at large. A final sphere might be the concerns of certain key stakeholder groups in society at large, including NGOs and watchdog groups, who might have particular ethical perspectives or expectations that need to be considered, not just about the process of assessment but also about the planned changes (or project) overall. What people consider to be ‘best practice’, ‘ethical’, ‘professional’ or even ‘acceptable’ practice usually depends on what standpoint they come from. This phenomenon is known as ‘framing’ (Kaufman & Smith 1999; Wynne 2001; Shmueli et al. 2006; Oughton & Bracken 2009).Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Nevertheless, although these spheres do not necessarily share the same understandings of ethics or ethical obligations, some general and arguably universal principles can be inferred from moral and philosophical foundations. For example, one of the first national statements on research ethics to be implemented (although see Israel & Hay 2006 for a longer discussion on the origins of research ethics) was the Belmont Report (United States National Commission for Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research 1978), which arose in part in response to public outcry about various medical experiments, specifically the now notorious Tuskegee Syphilis Study which exploited, deceived and withheld medical treatment from rural black men in Alabama (Thomas & Quinn 1991; Shore 2007). The Belmont Report (United States National Commission for Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research 1978; also see Freed-Taylor 1994), which continues to be the basis of institutional ethics procedures in the USA, established that there are three overarching scientific norms that govern all research involving humans:

respect for persons – requiring both that the autonomy of persons is respected and that individuals with diminished autonomy are protected;

beneficence – by which they mean non-maleficence (i.e. an obligation to do no harm) as well as a need to maximize well-being; and

justice – ensuring reasonable, non-exploitative and carefully considered procedures with fair distribution of costs and benefits.

The Belmont Report differentiated between research and practice; however, more recent codes tend not to make this distinction. The Australian National Statement (Australian Government 2007), for example, has a lengthy discussion on the definition of ‘research’, making it clear that it should be understood in very broad terms. Nevertheless, Guillemin and Gillam (2004) make a case for ‘ethics in practice’ or micro-ethics, arguing that practitioners need assistance for dealing with what happens at specific individual encounters. The general view, however, is that ethical guidelines should not be prescriptive and that they will sometimes be contradictory. Rather than have specific rules for micro-situations, practitioners should be equipped with (and trained in) ethico-analytical skills to be able to make their own ethical decisions at the micro level and to be able to defend them at the macro level.

It is generally understood that professionals (and thus impact assessment practitioners) have ethical obligations to: society generally; employers, clients and/or funders; fellow colleagues, employees and in the case of academics to students; the professional community to which they belong and/or operate; and research participants and the communities to which they (the participants and arguably the professionals) belong (Marcuse 1976; Jowell 1986; Social Research Association (UK) 2003; Social Policy Association (UK) 2009).

The obligation to society was originally seen as being paramount, leading to a primary obligation ‘to protect the safety, health, property and welfare of the public’ (Holemans & Lodewyckx 1996, p. 22). The obligation to society requires impact assessment professionals to act with integrity, and to be committed to the fair and proper conduct of their research in terms of the collection of accurate data and the use of appropriate and valid analytical methods. They are expected to avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest (situations where they could personally benefit) and to be mindful of moral hazard (i.e. situations where the professional does not bear the consequences of any risks they take and may therefore be excessive in their suggestions or actions). They would be expected to restrict their activities to remain within their area of competence (Jamal & Bowie 1995; American Evaluation Association 2004). They have a duty of care, that is, ‘an obligation to take reasonable care to avoid causing foreseeable harm to another person or their property’ (Legal Aid Queensland 2012, online). They also need to ensure the provision of procedural and natural justice (Morrison-Saunders & Early 2008). The primary duty to society also means that there is an expectation that results of social research would be publicly available.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

With the maturing of discussions about ethical professional practice in the different spheres mentioned above, a gradual change in the emphasis in the codes of ethics can be discerned. Earlier codes tended to focus on obligations to society and to the proper conduct of research, whereas newer codes tend to focus on obligations to research participants. Another way of expressing this change is that there has been a shift from normative ethics to procedural ethics (Kenny & Giacomini 2005). A specific example of this is in the Australian Government (1999, p. 11) National Statement, where Clause 1.4 states that ‘Each research protocol must be designed to ensure that respect for the dignity and well being of the participants takes precedence over the expected benefits to knowledge’, although this statement was not repeated in the 2007 version of the document. The 2012 version of the American Anthropological Association (2012, p. 9), however, clearly states ‘obligations to research participants are usually primary’.

Principles for ethical social research
Despite these varied contexts (spheres) discussed above, it is possible to distil a number of inter-related principles that are generally considered to be the basis of ethical research involving humans. This set of principles was identified by undertaking an in-depth literature review and a document analysis of key documents in the ethics in research field, specifically:

national and regional statements from governments or government agencies about research involving humans – for example, Australian Government (2007), AIATSIS (2011), the UK Economic and Social Research Council (2012), Institute for Employment Studies (2004), UK Civil Service (2005), United States National Commission for Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1978);

the ethical guidelines of various professional associations – for example, in addition to the American associations mentioned earlier, the Sociological Association of Aotearoa (New Zealand) (1990), The Australian Sociological Association (2003), the Social Research Association (UK) (2003), the Social Policy Association (UK) (2009), the (UK) Royal Anthropological Institute (2012), and the International Association for Impact Assessment (2009);Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

the ethical guidelines of various international agencies – for example, United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (1994), Tropenbos International (Persoon & Minter 2011) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (2004);

the discussion around research ethics as presented in social research methods textbooks – for example, Babbie (1989), Bulmer (1982, 2001), Hay (2010a, b) and Hennink et al. (2011); and

recent books and key journal articles specifically on professional ethics or ethics in research – for example, Gregory (2003), Guillemin & Gillam (2004), Haggerty (2004), Hoeyer et al. (2005), Richardson (2005), Israel & Hay (2006), Resnik (2008), Amon et al. (2012) and Hoekveld & Needham (2013).

The identified principles are described below. Not all sources mentioned above include all the principles described below, but rather the principles presented here represent an analytical summary of the principles implied or stated in the documents considered. In the language of qualitative research, the set of principles represents the themes that emerged from the analysis.

Although social scientists do not regard the principles as strict rules but rather as general principles to inform discussion and practice, institutional ethics committees have tended to interpret and implement them rigidly, resulting in resistance in various quarters (e.g. Adler & Adler 2002; Haggerty 2004; Israel & Hay 2006; Shore 2007; Dyer & Demeritt 2009).

Because of the wide use of social research methods in SIA, the ethical principles applying to social research might be considered as also applying to SIA practitioners. They also arguably apply to impact assessment practitioners who derive or access any form of data from people. We therefore present these principles in order to encourage discussion about ethical practice amongst all impact assessment practitioners.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

The principles below are given in our words, but fairly reflect how they are understood in the social research field generally. Comments about their implications for SIA follow in the companion paper (Baines et al. 2013). While all principles potentially apply to SIA practice in general, there may be occasions when there is contradiction. In these situations, a practitioner would need to make a reasoned decision based on a balanced ethical judgement. The first two principles, respect for participants and informed consent, are the foundational principles from which all other principles cascade down. As the essence of ethical research, they are thus reflected in the other principles. Please note that the word ‘researcher’ is used in the principles, but this refers to anybody involved in a data-collection process and in the context of impact assessment therefore equates with practitioner.

Respect for participants – A researcher should always demonstrate respect in terms of all their interactions with participants including not judging them, not discrediting them, in ensuring that their views are faithfully recorded and given due consideration in the assessment process. Part of this respect is implied by the terminology of ‘participant’ (rather than ‘respondent’ or ‘subject’). An important dimension of this respect relates to ensuring the protection of persons with diminished autonomy, and those who are marginalized or vulnerable. Special recognition and procedures may also be required in the case of Indigenous peoples (see below).

Informed consent – Participation should be the voluntary choice of the participants and should be based on sufficient information and an adequate understanding of the research and the consequences of their participation. This implies that the researcher must disclose all relevant information and any possible risks of participation, especially any issues around what will happen to the data obtained. It is usually expected that informed consent be recorded in writing (as signed consent forms) and be producible by the researcher in the event of an audit up to several years after the research was completed. Israel and Hay (2006) provide an extensive discussion of what constitutes informed consent.

Specific permission required for audio- or video-recording – If the researcher intends to audiorecord (i.e. ‘tape’), videorecord (i.e. ‘film’) or photograph any participant, their specific approval for this must be given in advance (and may in fact be a legal requirement under the privacy legislation of most countries).

Voluntary participation and no coercion – As implied by the principle of informed consent, participation must be voluntary and not subject to any coercion or threat of harm for non-participation. Non-coercion is not taken to mean that there should not be payments for participation; however, any such payment should be commensurate with the amount of time and normal income expectations of the participants, and should not be excessive such that it would constitute a bribe or inappropriate inducement.

Right to withdraw – Consistent with the principle of voluntary participation, participants must know that they can withdraw at any time and have any of their data already recorded removed from the analysis where this is possible.

Full disclosure of funding sources – An implication of the principle of informed consent is that there must be full disclosure of the sources of funding for the research.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

No harm to participants – It is fundamental that no harm must come to participants as a result of their participation in the research. This means not only that participants must not be exposed to pain or danger in the course of the research (such as in a psychological experiment or medical trial), but also that there must be no adverse consequences to a person as a result of their participation. This latter issue can be complicated. For example, a researcher cannot guarantee that an employer would not take action against an employee for their participation or for comments they might make, although such a risk should be addressed by ensuring the anonymity and/or confidentiality measures discussed below. At the very least, the researcher must do their utmost to protect participants from any harm, and to ensure under the principle of informed consent that the participant is fully appraised of all possible risks from participation. Sometimes, participation in social research will necessarily cause a participant to reflect on personal issues, bringing about emotional distress. Here the researcher’s obligation is to ensure that the research interaction does not finish until there is some resolution of the emotional distress that has arisen, and that there is recourse to follow-up assistance or counselling.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Avoidance of undue intrusion – Respect for participants means that there will be discussion only of those matters that are relevant to the issues under research and that enquiries should be confined to those issues. It implies a respect for the personal lives of participants and that researchers should be cognizant of what is personal and private.

No use of deception – The principle of respect for participants and professional integrity implies that the use of deception or covert methods should only be used under certain circumstances and only when approved by a duly appointed ethics committee.

Presumption and preservation of anonymity – There is an assumption of anonymity, that is, people participate in research on the presumption that they will be anonymous and that their anonymity will be protected, unless they have given permission to be named. Thus, there is a requirement for the expressed permission from participants for any use of the real names of people or where a person’s identity would be evident from the context (for example, the mayor or other public figure identified by the public role).Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Right to check and modify a transcript – Where people are named or identifiable, those participants have the right to check how they are quoted and to make changes to a transcript and any draft publication that may be prepared to ensure they agree with the way they are recorded. Some codes (e.g. Australian Government 2007, clause 3.1.15) suggest that respect for participants means that all participants should be able to check their transcript for accuracy and completeness.

Confidentiality of personal matters – Respect for participants means that confidentiality (i.e. non-disclosure of information) should be accorded to all private or personal matters or views, or when any such undertaking is given. This means that there is a responsibility on the researcher to make judgements about what should be reported and what should not be publicly disclosed. The fact that something was revealed to the researcher does not automatically entitle the researcher to make it public. When information is entrusted to a researcher in confidence, such confidentiality must be protected.

Data protection – Because of the confidentiality of data, care must be taken to ensure that the data are stored securely and safe from unauthorized access. It is also expected that there be a stated timeline for safe disposal of the data. However, because of other institutional requirements that researchers be able to produce raw data in the event of an audit or complaint and to safeguard against fraud, typically this would be a number of years after completion of the project.

Enabling participation – Researchers have an ethical responsibility to ensure that all relevant individuals and groups are included in the research, and where they might ordinarily be excluded by reasons of language, access or cost to participate, that there be a genuine attempt to enable participation by providing appropriate means of access such as translation, transportation, or payments to offset the cost of attendance.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Ethical governance – For the proper functioning of ethical procedures it is necessary that there be a system of ethical governance in place. There needs to be a committee or other facility that can review research protocols prior to the research taking place, oversee and/or monitor research activities, provide advice to researchers and participants, and make judgements in relation to complaints.

Grievance procedure – Good ethical governance requires that participants have access to a grievance procedure and recourse to corrective action. The grievance procedure must be procedurally fair, and properly disclosed to participants.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Appropriateness of research methodology – Respect for participants as well as professional probity means that the research procedure must have reliability and validity. Participants give their time (whether free or paid) on the presumption that the research is legitimate, worthwhile and valid.

Full reporting of methods – Research methods and analytical procedures must be fully disclosed to: enable replication of the research by another researcher; enable peer review of the adequacy and ethicality of the methodology; and to encourage critical self-reflection on the limitations of the methodology and any implications for the results and conclusions.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

These principles provide ethical guidance to researchers and practitioners and to the institutions in which they work. Rather than being implemented uncritically, the guidance is meant to encourage an understanding and critical reflection on ethical issues. It should be accepted that there will be circumstances that might obviate the rigid implementation of one or more of these principles, as discussed in the companion paper. However, all researchers and practitioners have an individual and collective responsibility to ensure ethical practice, with the team leader having overall responsibility and a specific role in ensuring compliance by all team members. Since ethical understandings will vary between individuals and across professional groups, there needs to be discussion of ethics in all team situations, especially given the interdisciplinary work contexts that typically apply in impact assessment.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Respecting Indigenous peoples
The first principle listed above, respect for participants, would also imply respect for the individual and societal differences and beliefs of various peoples, and, for example, expecting that researchers/practitioners would not regard or treat everyone as being homogenous. A specific application of this principle that is very relevant to impact assessment relates to Indigenous peoples. Because of past serious cases of unethical research practice by various professions (Cochran et al. 2008), and because of the growing assertion of Indigenous peoples’ rights as manifested in, for example, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (United Nations General Assembly 2007), various organizations, including the IAIA (Croal et al. 2012) have been developing codes of practice for research or other interactions involving Indigenous peoples (e.g. Castellano 2004; Convention on Biological Diversity 2004; Persoon & Minter 2011). One example of such a code was developed by the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS 2011), with the key principles in that code being presented in Box 1.

Box 1: Principles for Research involving Indigenous Peoples (AIATSIS 2011)
Principle 1: Recognition of the diversity and uniqueness of peoples, as well as of individuals, is essential.

Principle 2: The rights of Indigenous peoples to self-determination must be recognized.

Principle 3: The rights of Indigenous peoples to their intangible heritage must be recognized.

Principle 4: Rights in the traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions of Indigenous peoples must be respected, protected and maintained.

Principle 5: Indigenous knowledge, practices and innovations must be respected, protected and maintained.

Principle 6: Consultation, negotiation and free, prior and informed consent are the foundations for research with or about Indigenous peoples.

Principle 7: Responsibility for consultation and negotiation is ongoing.

Principle 8: Consultation and negotiation should achieve mutual understanding about the proposed research.

Principle 9: Negotiation should result in a formal agreement for the conduct of a research project.

Principle 10: Indigenous people have the right to full participation appropriate to their skills and experiences in research projects and processes.

Principle 11: Indigenous people involved in research, or who may be affected by research, should benefit from, and not be disadvantaged by, the research project.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Principle 12: Research outcomes should include specific results that respond to the needs and interests of Indigenous people.

Principle 13: Plans should be agreed for managing use of, and access to, research results.

Principle 14: Research projects should include appropriate mechanisms and procedures for reporting on ethical aspects of the research and complying with these guidelines.

Although the AIATSIS and similar codes typically address the same issues as mentioned in the ethical research principles presented in this paper, in the AIATSIS, IAIA (Croal et al. 2012) and related codes there is an explicit mention of the wider rights of Indigenous peoples and the need for the researcher/practitioner to acknowledge and protect those rights. For example, the introduction to the AIATSIS (2011, p. 4) guidelines starts with the words:

Indigenous peoples have inherent rights, including the right to self-determination. The principles in these Guidelines … are founded on respect for their rights. These include rights to full and fair participation in any processes, projects and activities that impact on them, and the right to control and maintain their culture and heritage. AIATSIS considers that these principles are not only a matter of ethical research practice but of human rights.

It is clear that the data collection processes (i.e. research) being undertaken for impact assessments must not only respect international understandings of ethical social research, but must also comply with the expanding domain of human rights (Kemp & Vanclay 2013). The AIATSIS Principle 6 states that the principle of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC) should be applied even to research with or about Indigenous peoples. The same is the case with the code of conduct produced by the Netherlands-based development agency/NGO, Tropenbos International (Persoon & Minter 2011). Thus, FPIC is not just a concept pertaining to the development project for which an impact assessment is being done; the concept of FPIC also applies to the impact assessment process itself. When applied to research, ostensibly FPIC would in practice be no different to ‘informed consent’ as implied by the guidelines for ethical research; however, FPIC arguably has a more significant legal and international standing than ‘informed consent’. As FPIC, informed consent becomes elevated to a human rights discourse rather than being just a matter of ethical research practice.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

The principles for research involving Indigenous peoples and the way they are put into effect are likely to have several consequences for researchers (and impact assessment professionals). It is important for practitioners to realize that Indigenous participation cannot be presumed or demanded. Indigenous peoples will be unlikely to accept the presumption that a researcher or practitioner has a right to do research or collect data. A convincing case as to why Indigenous peoples should participate will need to be made. The continued agreement of Indigenous peoples to participate in the research will probably depend on the practitioner being genuine, in treating the participants as equal partners in the process, and in the practitioner demonstrating meaningful engagement and reciprocity (AIATSIS 2011; Croal et al. 2012). This will mean that Indigenous peoples will want to negotiate about what research will be about, how it will be done, to what uses the results will be put, and how the data will be stored.

Potential actions to improve the ethicality of professional practice
The commitment and adherence to ethical practice rely on the efforts of practitioners, as well as those of their client organizations and professional associations. Professional organizations such as the IAIA can promote and provide active support for ethical practice. There is a suite of measures that can be undertaken to support ethical practice at the individual and organizational level (extracted/modified from Rossouw 2002), including:

a participatory process for developing and reviewing a code of ethics for good practice;

a commitment to communicating the code of ethics, regularly and in varied ways so that it is reinforced amongst practitioners;

a commitment to ensuring that new practitioners become acquainted with the code;

the provision of opportunities for the open discussion of ethical dilemmas and case studies;

a commitment to the ongoing enforcement of the code by positive enforcement rewarding or acknowledging practitioners who behave in an exemplary fashion and by punishment of some kind for those who violate the code;

an organizational procedure for addressing code violations and providing necessary support to monitor compliance;

public commitment to the code, especially on the part of people who have high standing in the organization.

The ethical performance of an association can be considered by using the criteria above. For example, the IAIA can be evaluated against these criteria as follows:

Criterion 1 – the IAIA has developed and actively promotes its ethical statement (see International Association for Impact Assessment 2009) and Code of Conduct (see Box 2) amongst its members.

Box 2: IAIA’s Code of Conduct (source: International Association for Impact Assessment 2009, p. 4)
As a self-ascribed professional member of the IAIA, the information and services that I provide must be of the highest quality and reliability. I consequently commit myself:Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

To conduct my professional activities with integrity, honesty, and free from any misrepresentation or deliberate bias.

To conduct my professional activities only in subject areas in which I have competence through, education, training or experience. I will engage, or participate with, other professionals in subject areas where I am less competent.

To take care that my professional activities promote sustainable and equitable actions as well as a holistic approach to impact assessment.

To check that all policies, plans, activities, or projects with which I am involved are consistent with all applicable laws, regulations, policies and guidelines.

To refuse to provide professional services whenever the professional is required to bias the analysis or omit or distort facts in order to arrive at a predetermined finding or result.

To disclose to employers and clients and in all written reports, any personal or financial interest that could reasonably raise concerns as to a possible conflict of interest.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

To strive to continually improve my professional knowledge and skills and to stay current with new developments in impact assessment and my associated fields of competence.

To acknowledge the sources I have used in my analysis and the preparation of reports.

To accept that my name will be removed from the list of self-ascribed professional members of the IAIA should I be found to be in breach of this code by a disciplinary task-group constituted by the IAIA Board of Directors

Criterion 2 – the IAIA vigorously communicates the existence of the Code, and strongly encourages that practitioners endorse the Code by maintaining a register of signatories. It also has a status designation of ‘Sustaining Member’ given to the IAIA members who have signed the Code of Conduct and have four years or more of continuous membership.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

Criterion 3 – the IAIA draws attention of new members to the code in various ways, including by making the Code prominent on the membership pages of the website.

Criterion 4 – the IAIA does provide opportunities for the open discussion of ethical dilemmas at its conferences, in its journal (such as in this and the companion paper) and newsletter, and in the online discussion forums that belong to each section of the IAIA;

Criterion 5 – Although the IAIA does have a suite of awards given annually, there is no evidence that the IAIA has demonstrated positive enforcement by having rewarded or acknowledged practitioners specifically for exemplary ethical behaviour or that there has been any punishment of those who may have violated the code.

Criterion 6 – the IAIA currently lacks a clear organizational procedure for addressing code violations and does not have the necessary support to monitor compliance.

Criterion 7 – the IAIA does facilitate public commitment to the code, including by people who have high standing, by maintaining a register of signatories to the Code.

In addition, to its Code of Conduct, the IAIA has developed a range of supporting information such as an ethical practice ‘fast tip’ (Fuggle 2012) and a range of best practice guidance documents which it makes available on its website (see http://www.iaia.org/publications-resources/downloadable-publications.aspx). It has also facilitated the publishing of a range of papers on the principles and/or best practice of impact assessment (e.g. Vanclay 2003a; Vanclay 2003b; Marshall et al. 2005; Canter & Ross 2010; Cave 2012), as well as various state-of-the-art papers (e.g. Adelle & Weiland 2012; Bond & Pope 2012; Bond et al. 2012; Esteves et al. 2012; Harris-Roxas et al. 2012; Morgan 2012; Fundingsland Tetlow & Hanusch 2012.

Comparing the IAIA’s Code of Conduct (Box 2) against the 18 principles for ethical research as presented in this paper reveals some shortcomings. The IAIA’s Code seems to be more typical of the earlier codes which, as discussed at the beginning of this paper, tended to focus on obligations to society and the proper conduct of research, rather than being akin to the newer codes, which tend to focus more on obligations to participants. It would be desirable for the IAIA’s Code to be revamped, increasing the emphasis on respect for affected peoples in the conduct of impact assessment and including requirements about ‘informed consent’ (from the research ethics discourse), and perhaps even ‘free, prior and informed consent’ (from the Indigenous rights discourse).

It is important to realize that ethical and professional practice is more than just having a Code of Conduct. All impact assessment practitioners need to be active in upholding and promoting ethical standards of professional practice through their own practice and by peer support. Most importantly, an ongoing dialogue is needed in the profession, a dialogue this paper and its companion paper seek to stimulate.

Conclusion
It is increasingly recognized that professionalism in all fields must be underpinned by ethical practice. Arguably, being ‘professional’ is defined by a commitment to and observance of ethical behaviour. However, like the various subfields of impact assessment, the fields of professional ethics and research ethics are also developing over time. The ethical expectations surrounding professional practice have become more exacting, covering the mechanics of undertaking data collection for an impact assessment (i.e. research), as well as the broader moral obligations and philosophical orientations in which impact assessment practice occurs.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

A marked shift has occurred in institutional codes of ethics, with the primary obligation to society and the proper conduct of data collection becoming replaced by an increased focus on obligations to research participants. Respect for research participants (i.e. people) and ‘informed consent’ are now the primary ethical principles. Related to this primacy is that social research ethics are deemed to apply to all research that is about or with human beings. The term ‘research’ is now defined very broadly to involve any data collection activity as well as the creation of novel ideas. Thus data collection and other activities undertaken as part of impact assessments that involve people in any way whatsoever require that the ethical principles for research involving humans be considered.

The broadening of the field of research ethics also extends to the domains to which it applies. While institutional research ethics committees have typically been associated with universities or government-funded research institutions, there is an increasing social expectation that the ethical principles and procedures will be applied regardless of the setting of the research. Thus, private sector consultants engaged to undertake data collection for an impact assessment will increasingly be expected to comply with the same ethical principles as researchers in public sector agencies. Professional associations such as the IAIA need to play a key role in setting and enforcing these increasingly more exacting professional practice standards.

Best practice in impact assessment will essentially require full observance of the 18 principles documented in this paper: respect for participants, informed consent, specific permission required for audio or video recording, voluntary participation and no coercion, participant right to withdraw, full disclosure of funding sources, no harm to participants, avoidance of undue intrusion, no use of deception, the presumption and preservation of anonymity, participant right to check and modify a transcript, confidentiality of personal matters, data protection, enabling participation, ethical governance, provision of grievance procedures, appropriateness of research methodology and full reporting of methods.

The relatively recent rise in the recognition of human rights issues in impact assessment (Kemp & Vanclay 2013), the increasing acknowledgement of the rights of Indigenous peoples (United Nations General Assembly 2007; Croal et al. 2012), and specifically the concept of ‘free, prior and informed consent’ (Hanna & Vanclay 2013), will also influence the consideration of ethical issues that need to be considered in professional impact assessment practice in the future.

Through this paper and the companion paper, we hope to increase awareness of ethical considerations and to improve the practice of impact assessment.

Acknowledgements
This paper and its companion paper are a further development of a book chapter by James Baines and Nick Taylor published in Frank Vanclay & Ana Maria Esteves (eds) 2011 New Directions in Social Impact Assessment, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Comments were provided by Ana Maria Esteves, Philippe Hanna, Lucy McCombes, Angus Morrison-Saunders and students and staff of the Faculty of Spatial Sciences at the University of Groningen.Principles of Research Ethics Essay.

The post Principles of Research Ethics Essay. appeared first on Online Nursing Essay.