Ethics, Reflexivity, and “Ethically Important Moments” in Research

While engaged in a research project involving the use of visual methods with children, the authors discovered that there are many ethical considerations beyond what could have been predicted at the outset. Some of these considerations are important with respect to research with children in general, while others arise more particularly when using visual methods. Framed around the two broad categories of procedural ethics and ethics in practice, five areas of ethical concern are considered: (a) assent or willingness to participate, (b) informed consent and assent using visual methods, (c) issues of disclosure, (d) power imbalances, and (e) representations of the child. The authors propose that researcher reflexivity on ethically important moments lies at the heart of living ethical practice in qualitative research and that the ideals of enabling child safety, dignity, and voice serve as useful guides in the quest for ethical practices in research with children.

Qualitative research continues to grow around the world. More and more scholars and institutions of higher education continue to embrace it. Publications must continue to be on practical ways of conducting qualitative research in general and conducting it especially ethically. This paper is focused primarily on practical ways of enhancing ethical practices in qualitative research. While many qualitative research books and articles discuss ethical considerations, it is good to have a paper that synthesizes effective strategies to enhance ethics in a much more practical way. This paper goes from the definition of ethics to the importance of ethical practices and to the implementation of practical considerations before, during, and after data collection in qualitative research. This paper is not meant to be exhaustive; however, it should be a good guide for qualitative researchers who wish to avail of practical strategies for good ethical practices.

Research is one of the tri-focal functions of a university. The educational institution is the first home and ‘engine’ of scientific studies. Educational institutions infinitely embrace research as humans continuously thirst for knowledge to improve our quality of life. Thus, ethical research practice has always been an issue and matter of academic concern in schools. This article aims to review evidence of ethical research practices in educational institutions. The references and sources of this literature review came from known research databases such as Google Scholar, Open Access Directory Journals, and prominent University Websites with specific sections on Research and Ethics. Furthermore, this provides a better understanding and a general picture of research ethical practices in schools that led to the development of a conceptual framework that illustrates the supposed-to-be ethical research practices and standards for schools that lead to the crafting of quality studies that are worth publishing and disseminating. Research ethical considerations and principles guide research designs and implementations. These include the universal standard and norm of ensuring the voluntary participation of and obtaining informed consent from research participants (Bhandari, 2022; Felzmann, 2009; & Resnik, 2020). Furthermore, this review also led to the researchers’ assumption that research ethical practices and principles are associated with the level of personal ethics and moral values of a researcher and that there is a difference in the degree of practice and consideration of research ethics with respect to the nature, purpose, and design of research. Lastly, this article illustrated in its framework that the assumptions and the primary principles of research ethics (Resnik, 2020; & Smith, 2003) are inputs to ethical considerations in research. Hence, these concepts strongly underpin the significant roles of the technical review boards (TRBs) and the research ethics committees (RECs) in educational institutions to ensure that academic and scientific research done in the school setting is of quality and with academic integrity, credibility, trustworthiness, and rigor (Bhandari, 2022).

Previous research has consistently highlighted the importance of stakeholder engagement in identifying and developing solutions to ethical challenges in genomic research, especially in Africa where such research is relatively new. In this paper, we examine what constitutes good ethical practice in research, from the perspectives of genomic research participants in Uganda. Our study was part of a multi-site qualitative study exploring these issues in Uganda, Ghana and Zambia. We purposively sampled various stakeholders including genomic research participants, researchers, research ethics committee members, policy makers and community members. This paper presents the findings from in-depth interviews with 27 people with diabetes who had participated in a diabetes genomic study. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews. Manual thematic content analysis was conducted using a framework approach. Findings indicate three key requirements that research participants see as vital for genomic research to be more responsive to research participants’ needs and contextual realities: (1) de-emphasising the role of experts and institutions in the consenting process, (2) clarity about the timing and nature of feedback both of findings relevant to the health of individuals and about the broad progress of the study, and (3) more effective support for research participants during and after the study.

Practitioners have frequent contact with populations underrepresented in scientific research--ethnic/racial groups, sexual minorities and others at risk for poor health and whose low participation in research does not reflect their representation in the general population. Practitioners aspire to partner with researchers to conduct research that benefits underrepresented groups. However, practitioners are often overlooked as a work force that can help erase inclusion disparities. We recruited (n = 282) practitioners (e.g. physicians, social workers, health educators) to examine associations between their attitudes toward research purposes, risks, benefits and confidentiality and their involvement in recruitment, interviewing and intervention facilitation. Participants worked in community-based agencies in Madrid and New York City (NYC), two large and densely populated cities. We used cross-sectional data and two-sample tests to compare attitudes toward research and practitioner involvement in recruiting, interviewing and facilitating interventions. We fit logistic regression models to assess associations between practitioner attitudes toward ethical practices and recruitment, interviewing and facilitating interventions. The likelihood of recruiting, interviewing and facilitating was more pronounced among practitioners agreeing more strongly with ethical research practices. Though Madrid practitioners reported stronger agreement with ethical research practices, NYC practitioners were more involved in recruiting, interviewing and facilitating interventions. Practitioners can be trained to improve attitudes toward ethical practices and increase inclusion of underrepresented populations in research. Funders and researchers are encouraged to offer opportunities for practitioner involvement by supporting research infrastructure development in local agencies. Practices that promise to facilitate inclusion herein may be used in other countries.

Research on health and disasters within the social sciences and public health is produced from a wide range of methodological and disciplinary perspectives. Major disaster events continue to highlight the need for health and disaster researchers to further reflect on the procedural and practical aspects of research ethics. We conduct a scoping review and qualitative frame analysis of 76 empirical articles from 2000 onwards, with the aim of uncovering the dominant framings of ‘ethical practice’ within health and disaster literature. The review demonstrates that the literature presents competing framings of risk – namely, a more individualist and biomedical understanding of trauma, and a focus on community-level and contextual aspects of risk, respectively. These competing frames of risk determine how different parts of the field negotiate ethical processes and practices. Additional points of tension are found in the way in which disaster-affected people and places are characterised as (or as not) particularly vulnerable, and the role of formal ethical review committees. This review synthesises proposed solutions from literature to improve both procedural and practical ethics and finds there are continued disagreements surrounding even the most frequently called-for changes. The contrasting framings of ethics problems and solutions within this field indicate the need for consensus around the practical ethics of health and disaster research. Further reflection is warranted for more coherent engagement between this research field and disaster-affected communities.

Sexual and reproductive health issues remain a huge public health challenge, especially in developing countries. These problems arise acutely in socio-cultural contexts marked by social prohibitions relating to adolescent sexuality. However, it is important to listen to adolescents to better understand how they experience their sexuality, the issues associated with it and their needs and expectations. For this, researchers must, among other things, appropriate the frame of reference of adolescents in terms of sexuality to promote relevant policies and interventions. But how can researchers conduct ethical research with people who are under parental care and socially condemned in relation to the research object? This article aims to contribute to the reflection on ethical research practices in sexual and reproductive health with African adolescents. In this paper, I have considered some ethical challenges and the prospects for solving them.

This chapter explores ethics in qualitative research. It outlines the broad ethical principles that underpin good research and the aspects of ethical practice that qualitative researchers are especially likely to need to consider when designing, conducting, and disseminating their research. The chapter explains ways of thinking about research ethics, beginning with some overarching philosophical principles, before moving on to discuss situational and relational aspects of ethical research practice. Formal codes of ethics, and practice guidelines developed by professional bodies and institutions, highlight three core concerns that researchers working with human subjects should attend to, namely: informed consent, confidentiality, and anonymity. The chapter also outlines how these apply to qualitative research. It also explores ethics associated with doing research. Although the requirements of research ethical review processes described in the chapter can help the researcher avoid many ethical issues in advance, ethical questions and dilemmas can arise during the conduct of a project.

Ideally, best practices in human research would evolve quickly in the wake of new ethical challenges, but in reality such challenges sometimes evoke Procrustean new oversight requirements that benefit neither human subjects nor science. The rapid advance of new topics, methods and ethical challenges in human research inevitably raises questions about the appropriateness of time-honored research practices, and about the most intelligent application of ethical principles to these new contexts. Such questions typically call for an insightful and nuanced understanding of the new context, rather than debate based on older conceptions. JERHRE serves as a forum to promote and publish meritorious empirical research on ethical issues, designed to enable us to learn from these challenges, and thereby hasten the evolution of best ethical practices in human research.

Two scientific domains that are crucial in “Biomedical Big Data”, computing and statistics, do not typically require “training in the responsible conduct of research” or research ethics. While “responsible conduct of research” (RCR) comprises interactions with subjects (human and non-human), it also involves interactions with other scientists, the scientific community, the public, and in some contexts, research funders. Historically, the development or emergence of disciplines and professions tend to involve a semi-simultaneous emergence of professional norms and/or codes of conduct. However, Biomedical Big Data is not emerging as a single discipline or profession, and engages practitioners from many diverse backgrounds. Moreover, the place of the data analyst or the computer scientist developing analytic algorithms seems to be too granular to be considered specifically within the activities that comprise “responsible research and innovation” (RRI). Current legal and policy-level considerations of Biomedical Big Data and RRI are implicitly assuming that scientists carrying out the research and achieving the innovations are exercising their scientific freedom – i.e., conducting research – responsibly. The assumption is that all scientists are trained to conduct research responsibly. In the United States, federal agencies funding research require that training in RCR be included – some of the time. Because the vast majority of research that was federally funded has not included Biomedical Big Data, RCR training paradigms have emerged over the past 20 years in US institutions that are not particularly relevant for Big Data. While it would be efficient to utilize such established, well-known, easily-documented RCR training programs, this chapter discusses how and why this is less likely to support the development of professional norms that are relevant for Biomedical Big Data. This chapter will describe an alternative approach that can support ongoing reflection on professional obligations, which can be used in a wide range of ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI), including those that have not yet been identified. This may be the greatest strength of this alternative approach for preparing practitioners for Biomedical Big Data, because the ability to apply prior learning in ethics to previously unseen problems is especially critical in the current era of dynamic and massive data accumulation. To support the development of normative ethical practices among practitioners in Biomedical Big Data, this chapter reviews the guidelines for professional practice from three statistical associations (American Statistical Association; Royal Statistics Society; International Statistics Institute) and from the Association of Computing Machinery. These can be leveraged to ensure that, in their work with Biomedical Big Data, participants know and understand the ethical, legal, and social implications of that work. Formal integration of these (or other relevant) guidelines into the preparation for practice with data (big and small) can help in dealing with ethical challenges currently arising with Big Data in biomedical research; moreover, this integration can also help deal with challenges that have not yet arisen. These outcomes, which are consistent with recent calls for the institutionalization of reflection and reasoning around ELSI across scientific disciplines, in Europe, are only possible as long as the integration effort does not follow a currently-dominant paradigm for training in RCR. Preparing scientists to engage competently in conversations around ethical issues in Biomedical Big Data requires purposeful, discipline-relevant, and developmental training that can come from, and support, a culture of ethical biomedical research and practice with Big Data.

Ethics and Best Practices of Studying Contemporary Human Populations

Is there an ethical operational research practice? And what this implies for our research?

Research integrity: time for global action

This paper exhorts geographers to become more active in debate about ethical research practice. It also suggests that ethical theory, practical problems, and lessons learned from postmodern thought make the prospects of establishing prescriptive codes of ethics unlikely. Instead, flexible prompts for moral contemplation might be used to encourage careful thought on matters of ethics. Because the practical feasibility of moral prompts rests on the existence of moral imaginations, it is vital to consider ways in which those imaginations might be stimulated and nurtured. Professional associations and university academics have significant roles to play in this. Geographers must position themselves as effective agents in the processes by which professional research ethics are shaped rather than awaiting the potentially inappropriate outcomes of other agencies ‘ deliberations.

Bicultural researchers are well positioned to identify tensions, disrupt binaries of positions, and reconcile differences across cultural contexts to ensure ethical research practices. This article focuses on a bicultural researcher's experiences of ethically important moments in research activities with Muslim immigrant women. Three ethical principles of respect, justice, and concern for welfare are highlighted, revealing the implications of binary constructions of identity, the value of situated knowledge in creating ethical research practices, and the need to recognize agency as a counterforce to oppressive narratives about Muslim women.