Ethical Research Practice
Why Be Concerned about Ethics in Research ?

Social research is a complex activity;

• carried out within different cultural, legal, economic and political environments
• researchers must balance their own research interests, those of their research collaborators and the requirements of research sponsors.

In these circumstances, attention to ethical concerns is often limited. And yet, breaching ethical standards can sometimes undermine the entire research process.

In quantitative research, breaches can cause serious limitations in the ability of other, future, researchers to collect reliable and useful data; they can limit access to the respondents who provide the information required for research as well as access to statistical data collected by others. Research designs and procedures that fail to meet ethical standards, to treat subjects with respect, are likely to result in misleading, inconclusive and biased results.

For comparative research, the problems are compounded.  The data subjects must be sure that the information they provide is handled with the same care by every analyst involved in the comparative study.   This is by no means straightforward, as many nations have either differing, or no, data protection laws in force.  These differences in national standards and procedures, in the perceptions of both the research community and the society as a whole, can make comparative social analysis a highly complex undertaking, and can sometimes sabotage the entire enterprise. 

This is no longer merely a technical problem.  What is required now for cross-national quantitative researchers is acceptance by the international research community itself of the need for common ethical concerns and the assumption by its members of the role of ethically sensitive researchers, responsible data collectors and conscientious data stewards.

What are the Elements of Ethical Research ?
These elements might be defined as a series of obligations:

• to society;
• to funders and employers;
• to colleagues;
• to subjects.

They relate to:

• definitions of research questions,
• decisions to carry out research and on the conduct, management and administration of research;
• effects on and relationships with the participants;
• recognition of limits of competence;
• effects on aggregates and communities; and interpretations and reporting of the results of research.

We can isolate the following basic considerations:

• the need to protect the statutory rights of members of the social community or groups being investigated, avoiding undue intrusion, obtaining informed consent, and protecting the rights to privacy of individuals and social groups;

• the need to frame research questions and agendas objectively, so as to widen the scope of social research, and to maintain confidence in the research process;

• the need to remain sensitive to, and cognisant of, social and cultural differences and to consider conflicting interests;

• the need to report findings completely, widely and objectively, with full information on methodologies employed, both to allow research work to be assessed by colleagues and to increase public confidence in its reliability.

What Kinds of Controls on Ethical Research Already Exist ?

• the externally imposed, such as legislation, legal, administrative and contractual arrangements, sanctions, or implementation of technical solutions,

• Data Protection Legislation relates to the protection of the right to privacy of the data subject.. The procedures contained in the legislation of the various European countries vary greatly, as does the stringency with which they are imposed.(See  Mochmann, Ekkehard and DeGuchteneire, Paul. Data Protection in Europe)This national legislation can, while protecting the rights of the individual national subjects of the data, impede the carrying out of comparative European studies. The recent publication of a draft European Data Protection Act by the European Community represents an attempt to overcome some of these difficulties, but brings with it some new potential barriers to comparative research

• Internal Review Board, to review all proposals for human research before the research is conducted to ascertain whether the research plan has adequately included the ethical dimensions of the project"

• measures operated by data brokers and electronic gatekeepers or monitors to ensure that some, at least, of the ethical principles and procedures are not abused and assisting in the administration of sanctions against misuse of research data, particularly statistical data. The effectiveness of these has considerably eased the problems faced by those contemplating comparative research, defusing data collector's fears that their data will be misused and by facilitating access to the data by centralised information provision and standardisation of both data and access procedures.

• Imposition of ethical behaviour via technical means (economisation, randomisation, etc.) Attitudes and procedures and stringency of imposition vary greatly among data collectors,.  The tension between concerns for confidentiality and researchers’ need for data is heightened when such procedures are employed.  Some attempts have been made towards standardisation but much remains to be done.

• those which assume internal regulation, such as educational programmes and the development of codes of professional conduct.
• educational components within social research training courses
• professional codes of ethics, best practice.

The general principles of all of these codes are concerned with the definition of the substantive questions being considered for empirical investigation and with the decisions made concerning the conduct of the research, the project organisation and the methodologies to be employed.  All of these concerns are of particular relevance to the cross-national or comparative researcher.

The principles appear in various guises in the majority of the codes, and are, in most cases, intended as sign-posts rather than detailed prescriptions. At base, it is universally assumed that any deviations from such ethical standards should be the result of conscious decision and not ignorance.

Summary of Basic Principles
PI = Principal Investigator

1. PI is responsible for all decisions.
2. All actions should be consistent with ethical standards.
3. Ethical issues should be considered from point of view of participant's society.
4. In cases of dilemmas, consultation with professional associations or colleagues is recommended.
5. Deviation from confidentiality rules implies that PI is taking greater responsibility; there is need for more outside counsel, and the need for more safeguards.
6. Conduct of research should maintain integrity and protect future research.
7. Selection of issues for empirical investigation should be based on best scientific judgment and must be related to important intellectual question, with humanitarian implication; there must be no other way to resolve question
8. In using human subjects, a risk-benefit analysis is advised.
9. If risk exists, these, as well as potential therapeutic effects must be justified in terms of benefit to client or patient.
10. No prior reason for belief in major permanent negative effects.
11. If permanent damage to participants, community or institutions with community (e.g. indigenous social scientists), research possibly abandoned.
    
    Conduct of Research
12. Research conducted in competent fashion, as objective, scientific project.
13. Research personnel qualified to use procedures employed.
14. Competent personnel and adequate facilities available if drugs involved.
15. No bias in design, conduct, or reporting of research - objective.
    
    Effects on and Relationships with the Participants
    Informed Consent
    General
16. Informed consent used in obtaining participants; investigators honour all commitments associated with agreements.
17. Participants to give informed consent; otherwise given by those responsible for participants. 
18. Informed consent used if potential effects on participants ambiguous or potentially hazardous.
19. If possible,informed consent should be obtained in writing.
20. Official permission to use gov't data, no matter how obtained.
    
    Provision of Information
21. Purposes, procedures, and risks of research (including possible hazards  explained to participant in way they understand.
22. Participants aware of possible consequences for group or community from which selected, in advance of their decision to participate.
23. The procedure used to obtain the participant's name should be described to him or her.
24. Sponsorship, financial and otherwise, should be specified to the potential participants.
25. Identity of those conducting research fully revealed to potential participants.
26. Names and addressees of research personnel left with participants so research personnel subsequently traceable.
27. Participants fully aware of all data gathering techniques, capacities of such techniques, and the extent to which participants will remain anonymous and data confidential. 
28. In longer projects, participants periodically informed of the progress of  research. 
29. When recording videotapes or film, subjects should have the right to approve the material made public (by viewing it and giving specific approval to each segment) as well as the nature of the audiences.
    
    Voluntary Consent
    Individuals know of option to refuse to participate.
30. Participants able to terminate involvement at any time and know option. 
31. No coercion, explicit or overt, used to encourage individuals to participate.
    
    Protection of Rights and Welfare of Participants
    General Issues
32. Dignity, privacy and interests of participants respected and protected.
33. Participants not harmed; welfare of participants priority over all other concerns.
34. Damage and suffering to participants minimised through procedural mechanisms and termination of risk studies asap; such effects justified only when problem not studiable in any other fashion.
35. Potential problems anticipated, no matter how remote, to ensure unexpected does not lead to major negative effects
36. Any harmful aftereffects should be eliminated.
37. Hopes or anxieties of potential participants not raised.
38. Research terminated if danger to the participants arises.
39. Use of clients seeking professional assistance for research purposes is justified only to the extent that they may derive direct benefits as clients.
    
    Deception
40. Deceit of participants only if absolutely necessary -no other way to study  problem.
41. Deception may be utilised.
42. If deceit involved, additional precautions to protect rights and welfare of  participants.
43. After study using deception, all participants given a thorough, complete and honest description of study and need for deception.
44. If deception not revealed, for humane or scientific reasons, investigator has  special obligation to protect interests and welfare of participants.
45. Research data confidential and all participants anonymous, unless they (or their legal guardians) have given permission for release of their identity.
46. If confidentiality or anonymity not guaranteed, participants should be aware of this and its possible consequences before involvement.
47. Persons in official positions (studied as part of a research project ) should provide written descriptions of their official roles, duties and so forth (which need not be treated as confidential information ) and provided with copy of final report.
48. Studies designed to provide descriptions of aggregates or collectivities should always guarantee anonymity to individual respondents.
49. 'Privacy' considered from perspective of participant and the participant's culture.
50. Material stored in data banks should not be used without the permission of the investigator who originally gathered the data.
51. If promises of confidentiality are honoured, investigators need not withhold information on misconduct of participants or organisations.
52. Specific procedures for organising data to ensure anonymity of participants
    
    Benefits to Participants
53. Fair return for all services of participants.
54. Increased self-knowledge, as a benefit to the participants, should be incorporated as a major part of the research design or procedures.
55. Copies or explanations of research provided to all participants.
56. Studies of aggregates or cultural subgroups should produce knowledge which will benefit them.
    
    Effects on Aggregates or Communities
57. Investigators familiar with, and respect, the host cultures.
58. Investigators cooperate with members of host society.
59. Investigators consider, in advance, potential effects on social structure of host community and potential changes in influence of various groups/individuals by study.
60. Investigators consider, in advance, potential effects and\report on  population or subgroup from which participants are drawn.
61. Participants aware, in advance, of potential effects upon aggregates or cultural subgroups which they represent.
62. Interests of collectivities and social systems of all kinds considered by  investigator.
    
    Interpretations and Reporting of the Results of the Research
63. All reports public documents, freely available to all.
64. Research procedures described fully and accurately in reports, including all evidence regardless of the support it provides for the research hypotheses; conclusions objective and unbiased.
65. Full and complete interpretations provided for all data and attempts made to prevent misrepresentations in writing research reports.
66. Sponsorship, purpose, sources of financial support, and investigators responsible for the research should be made clear in all publications related thereto.
67. If publication may jeopardise or damage population studied and complete disguise is impossible publication delayed.
68. Cross-cultural studies published in language and journals of host society, in addition to publication in other languages and other societies.
69. Appropriate credit given to all parties contributing to research.
70. Full, accurate disclosure of all published sources bearing on or contributing to the work is expected.
71. Publication of research findings on cultural subgroups to include description in terms understood by participants.
72. Whenever requested, raw data or other original documentation made available to qualified investigators.
73. Research with scientific merit always submitted for publication and not withheld from public presentation unless quality of research or analysis inadequate.

Major Professional and Academic Codes of Ethics

There are three basic broad types of professional codes of ethics:

• the "ideal" or "aspirational" which express the ideal practices of a profession which are often not realised in concrete situations because of human limitations and competing values;
• the "punitive" or "regulatory"; , which are explicit rules that state which acts are right and which are wrong, although these are not universally accepted by all scholars; and
• the "educational", neither moralistic nor punitive: ethical decisions which assume that the ethical or moral scientist makes individual judgments about research practices in light of his own values.  

The vast majority of codes of ethics are national rather than international, discipline-specific rather than cross-disciplinary. This can lead to particular problems for those engaged in cross-national research.

Recently, international research and funding bodies have either implemented such Codes of Ethical Practice or are actively discussing the issues.