examples of research ethical issues

Work With Us

Private Coaching

Done-For-You

Short Courses

Client Reviews

Free Resources

Research Ethics & Ethical Considerations

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Reviewers: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | May 2024

R esearch ethics are one of those “ unsexy but essential ” subjects that you need to fully understand (and apply) to conquer your dissertation, thesis or research paper. In this post, we’ll unpack research ethics using plain language and loads of examples .

Overview: Research Ethics 101

• What are research ethics?
• Why should you care?
• Research ethics principles
• Respect for persons
• Beneficence
• Objectivity
• Key takeaways

What (exactly) are research ethics?

At the simplest level, research ethics are a set of principles that ensure that your study is conducted responsibly, safely, and with integrity. More specifically, research ethics help protect the rights and welfare of your research participants, while also ensuring the credibility of your research findings.

Research ethics are critically important for a number of reasons:

Firstly, they’re a complete non-negotiable when it comes to getting your research proposal approved. Pretty much all universities will have a set of ethical criteria that student projects need to adhere to – and these are typically very strictly enforced. So, if your proposed study doesn’t tick the necessary ethical boxes, it won’t be approved .

Beyond the practical aspect of approval, research ethics are essential as they ensure that your study’s participants (whether human or animal) are properly protected . In turn, this fosters trust between you and your participants – as well as trust between researchers and the public more generally. As you can probably imagine, it wouldn’t be good if the general public had a negative perception of researchers!

Last but not least, research ethics help ensure that your study’s results are valid and reliable . In other words, that you measured the thing you intended to measure – and that other researchers can repeat your study. If you’re not familiar with the concepts of reliability and validity , we’ve got a straightforward explainer video covering that below.

The Core Principles

In practical terms, each university or institution will have its own ethics policy – so, what exactly constitutes “ethical research” will vary somewhat between institutions and countries. Nevertheless, there are a handful of core principles that shape ethics policies. These principles include:

Let’s unpack each of these to make them a little more tangible.

Ethics Principle 1: Respect for persons

As the name suggests, this principle is all about ensuring that your participants are treated fairly and respectfully . In practical terms, this means informed consent – in other words, participants should be fully informed about the nature of the research, as well as any potential risks. Additionally, they should be able to withdraw from the study at any time. This is especially important when you’re dealing with vulnerable populations – for example, children, the elderly or people with cognitive disabilities.

Another dimension of the “respect for persons” principle is confidentiality and data protection . In other words, your participants’ personal information should be kept strictly confidential and secure at all times. Depending on the specifics of your project, this might also involve anonymising or masking people’s identities. As mentioned earlier, the exact requirements will vary between universities, so be sure to thoroughly review your institution’s ethics policy before you start designing your project.

Need a helping hand?

Ethics Principle 2: Beneficence

This principle is a little more opaque, but in simple terms beneficence means that you, as the researcher, should aim to maximise the benefits of your work, while minimising any potential harm to your participants.

In practical terms, benefits could include advancing knowledge, improving health outcomes, or providing educational value. Conversely, potential harms could include:

• Physical harm from accidents or injuries
• Psychological harm, such as stress or embarrassment
• Social harm, such as stigmatisation or loss of reputation
• Economic harm – in other words, financial costs or lost income

Simply put, the beneficence principle means that researchers must always try to identify potential risks and take suitable measures to reduce or eliminate them.

Ethics Principle 3: Objectivity

As you can probably guess, this principle is all about attempting to minimise research bias to the greatest degree possible. In other words, you’ll need to reduce subjectivity and increase objectivity wherever possible.

In practical terms, this principle has the largest impact on the methodology of your study – specifically the data collection and data analysis aspects. For example, you’ll need to ensure that the selection of your participants (in other words, your sampling strategy ) is aligned with your research aims – and that your sample isn’t skewed in a way that supports your presuppositions.

If you’re keen to learn more about research bias and the various ways in which you could unintentionally skew your results, check out the video below.

Ethics Principle 4: Integrity

Again, no surprises here; this principle is all about producing “honest work” . It goes without saying that researchers should always conduct their work honestly and transparently, report their findings accurately, and disclose any potential conflicts of interest upfront.

This is all pretty obvious, but another aspect of the integrity principle that’s sometimes overlooked is respect for intellectual property . In practical terms, this means you need to honour any patents, copyrights, or other forms of intellectual property that you utilise while undertaking your research. Along the same vein, you shouldn’t use any unpublished data, methods, or results without explicit, written permission from the respective owner.

Linked to all of this is the broader issue of plagiarism . Needless to say, if you’re drawing on someone else’s published work, be sure to cite your sources, in the correct format. To make life easier, use a reference manager such as Mendeley or Zotero to ensure that your citations and reference list are perfectly polished.

FAQs: Research Ethics

Research ethics & ethical considertation, what is informed consent.

Informed consent simply means providing your potential participants with all necessary information about the study. This should include information regarding the study’s purpose, procedures, risks, and benefits. This information allows your potential participants to make a voluntary and informed decision about whether to participate.

How should I obtain consent from non-English speaking participants?

What about animals.

When conducting research with animals, ensure you adhere to ethical guidelines for the humane treatment of animals. Again, the exact requirements here will vary between institutions, but typically include minimising pain and distress, using alternatives where possible, and obtaining approval from an animal care and use committee.

What is the role of the ERB or IRB?

An ethics review board (ERB) or institutional review board (IRB) evaluates research proposals to ensure they meet ethical standards. The board reviews study designs, consent forms, and data handling procedures, to protect participants’ welfare and rights.

How can I obtain ethical approval for my project?

This varies between universities, but you will typically need to submit a detailed research proposal to your institution’s ethics committee. This proposal should include your research objectives, methods, and how you plan to address ethical considerations like informed consent, confidentiality, and risk minimisation. You can learn more about how to write a proposal here .

How do I ensure ethical collaboration when working with colleagues?

Collaborative research should be conducted with mutual respect and clear agreements on roles, contributions, and publication credits. Open communication is key to preventing conflicts and misunderstandings. Also, be sure to check whether your university has any specific requirements with regards to collaborative efforts and division of labour. 

How should I address ethical concerns relating to my funding source?

Key takeaways: research ethics 101.

Here’s a quick recap of the key points we’ve covered:

• Research ethics are a set of principles that ensure that your study is conducted responsibly.
• It’s essential that you design your study around these principles, or it simply won’t get approved.
• The four ethics principles we looked at are: respect for persons, beneficence, objectivity and integrity

As mentioned, the exact requirements will vary slightly depending on the institution and country, so be sure to thoroughly review your university’s research ethics policy before you start developing your study.

You Might Also Like:

How To Choose A Tutor For Your Dissertation

Hiring the right tutor for your dissertation or thesis can make the difference between passing and failing. Here’s what you need to consider.

5 Signs You Need A Dissertation Helper

Discover the 5 signs that suggest you need a dissertation helper to get unstuck, finish your degree and get your life back.

Writing A Dissertation While Working: A How-To Guide

Struggling to balance your dissertation with a full-time job and family? Learn practical strategies to achieve success.

How To Review & Understand Academic Literature Quickly

Learn how to fast-track your literature review by reading with intention and clarity. Dr E and Amy Murdock explain how.

Dissertation Writing Services: Far Worse Than You Think

Thinking about using a dissertation or thesis writing service? You might want to reconsider that move. Here’s what you need to know.

📄 FREE TEMPLATES

Research Topic Ideation

Proposal Writing

Literature Review

Methodology & Analysis

Academic Writing

Referencing & Citing

Apps, Tools & Tricks

The Grad Coach Podcast

Great piece!!!

Looking forward to know more about ethics in research.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Submit Comment

• Print Friendly

• Privacy Policy

Home » Ethical Considerations – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Ethical Considerations – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Ethical considerations are essential in research and professional practice, ensuring that work is conducted with integrity, respect, and responsibility. Addressing ethical concerns involves identifying and mitigating potential risks to participants, society, and the integrity of research. This guide explores the types of ethical considerations, real-world examples, and provides a structured writing guide for addressing ethics in academic or professional settings.

Ethical Considerations

Ethical considerations are principles that guide the conduct of research or practice to ensure fairness, transparency, and respect for all parties involved. In research, they protect participants’ rights, maintain data integrity, and prevent harm. Ethical considerations often include informed consent, confidentiality, conflict of interest, and the minimization of risks.

Key Purposes of Ethical Considerations :

• Protect Participant Rights : Safeguard privacy, consent, and well-being.
• Maintain Research Integrity : Ensure accuracy, transparency, and honesty.
• Promote Social Responsibility : Avoid harm to individuals and communities.

Types of Ethical Considerations

1. informed consent.

Informed consent ensures that participants are fully aware of the research purpose, methods, potential risks, and benefits. Participants must voluntarily agree to participate without coercion or undue influence.

• Example : In a medical study, participants are given a document explaining the study’s purpose, procedures, and risks, and must sign it to confirm they understand and agree to participate.

2. Confidentiality and Privacy

Confidentiality involves protecting participants’ data and privacy, ensuring that their personal information is not disclosed without permission. Researchers are responsible for safeguarding data and maintaining anonymity.

• Example : A survey on mental health should not reveal any identifying information about participants, and data should be stored securely to protect privacy.

3. Minimization of Harm

Minimizing harm requires researchers to reduce any risks to participants. Harm can be physical, psychological, social, or emotional, and researchers must design studies that avoid unnecessary distress.

• Example : In an experiment involving stressful tasks, researchers should monitor participants’ stress levels and allow them to withdraw if discomfort arises.

4. Conflict of Interest

Conflict of interest occurs when researchers or practitioners have personal or financial interests that could affect their objectivity. Disclosing any potential conflicts is critical to maintaining transparency and credibility.

• Example : A pharmaceutical researcher with stock in a drug company must disclose this relationship to avoid bias when reporting drug effectiveness.

5. Honesty and Integrity

Honesty and integrity in research involve accurately reporting findings, avoiding fabrication or falsification of data, and acknowledging any limitations of the study. Plagiarism is also a violation of research integrity.

• Example : A researcher should report all data, even if results do not support their hypothesis, to ensure truthful representation of findings.

6. Respect for Vulnerable Populations

Researchers must take special care when working with vulnerable populations, such as children, elderly individuals, or people with disabilities, ensuring extra protections and sensitive handling of data.

• Example : When conducting interviews with children, researchers must have parental consent and ensure questions are age-appropriate.

Ethical Consideration Examples by Field

• Healthcare : Researchers conducting clinical trials must obtain informed consent, minimize patient risk, and disclose conflicts of interest.
• Social Science : In a study on family dynamics, participants’ personal information should remain confidential, and sensitive topics should be approached carefully to avoid distress.
• Business Research : A study on employee satisfaction should ensure anonymity for participants to prevent any workplace repercussions.
• Environmental Research : Research on natural resources should consider the rights of indigenous communities, ensuring fair treatment and respect for their land.

Writing Guide for Ethical Considerations

When writing about ethical considerations in a research paper or proposal, it’s important to address each ethical aspect clearly and transparently. Follow these steps to effectively communicate ethical considerations:

Step 1: Describe Participant Consent Procedures

• Explain Informed Consent : Detail how you will obtain and document informed consent from participants.
• Provide Documentation Details : Mention any forms or consent documents that participants will complete.

Example : “Participants will be provided with a detailed consent form outlining the purpose, procedures, and potential risks associated with the study. They will have the opportunity to ask questions before providing written consent.”

Step 2: Outline Data Confidentiality Measures

• Describe Data Protection : Explain how you will store and protect participants’ data.
• Anonymity Procedures : Detail how personal identifiers will be removed or masked.

Example : “Data will be stored on encrypted servers accessible only to the research team. Identifying information will be replaced with codes to ensure anonymity in data analysis and reporting.”

Step 3: Address Potential Risks and Harm Reduction

• Identify Risks : Describe any risks participants might face and the steps you will take to mitigate them.
• Provide Support Options : Mention any resources, such as counseling or withdrawal options, available to participants.

Example : “Participants may experience mild discomfort during the interview. They will be informed that they can pause or stop the interview at any time without penalty.”

Step 4: Disclose Conflicts of Interest

• Explain Any Conflicts : If applicable, disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could affect the study’s outcomes.
• Provide Justification : Explain why you can still maintain objectivity despite the conflict.

Example : “The researcher has no financial interest in the outcome of this study, ensuring that all results are reported objectively and without bias.”

Step 5: Outline Measures for Working with Vulnerable Populations

• Highlight Special Protections : Detail any additional ethical safeguards for vulnerable groups.
• Explain Sensitivity Measures : Mention how you will tailor interactions to respect the needs of these populations.

Example : “Given that some participants are minors, parental consent will be obtained for each child, and questions will be designed to be age-appropriate.”

Step 6: Ensure Honesty and Transparency

• Discuss Reporting Standards : Explain your commitment to accurately report data, methods, and findings.
• Address Limitations : Mention any limitations in methodology or sample that could affect the study’s results.

Example : “The study will report all findings, including unexpected results, to ensure complete transparency and integrity.”

Tips for Addressing Ethical Considerations

• Use Clear Language : Avoid jargon and explain ethical procedures in simple terms to ensure understanding.
• Be Specific : Detail the exact steps you will take to address ethical issues, providing specific examples if possible.
• Acknowledge Limitations : Discuss any ethical limitations or constraints and how you plan to address them.
• Cite Ethical Guidelines : Refer to ethical standards set by organizations like the American Psychological Association (APA) or your institution’s guidelines.

Common Ethical Challenges and How to Address Them

• Participant Withdrawal : Always allow participants to withdraw at any time and explain how this will be managed in your research.
• Data Security : Ensure data protection by using secure servers, password-protected files, and, if needed, anonymizing data.
• Bias Prevention : Avoid leading questions or biased analysis methods that could influence results. Stay objective in interpretation.
• Reporting Sensitive Findings : Be mindful of sensitive results that could impact participants or the public. Use appropriate language and provide context.

Ethical considerations are foundational to conducting responsible, credible research. Addressing ethics not only safeguards participants but also upholds the integrity of the research process. By considering issues like informed consent, confidentiality, and minimizing harm, researchers can ensure that their work respects and protects all involved parties. This guide outlines the essential ethical components and provides a writing framework for addressing these considerations, ensuring that ethical practices are clearly communicated in any research endeavor.

• Resnik, D. B. (2020). The Ethics of Research with Human Subjects: Protecting People, Advancing Science, Promoting Trust . Springer.
• American Psychological Association. (2017). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct . APA.
• Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2019). Principles of Biomedical Ethics . Oxford University Press.
• Flick, U. (2018). An Introduction to Qualitative Research . Sage Publications.
• Israel, M., & Hay, I. (2006). Research Ethics for Social Scientists: Between Ethical Conduct and Regulatory Compliance . Sage Publications.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Research Paper Title Page – Example and Making...

Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and...

Dissertation Methodology – Structure, Example...

Research Results Section – Writing Guide and...

Conceptual Framework – Types, Methodology and...

Thesis Statement – Examples, Writing Guide

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Common Ethical Issues In Research And Publication

Ng chirk jenn.

• Author information
• Article notes
• Copyright and License information

Dr Ng Chirk Jenn, Senior lecturer, Department of Primary Care Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Tel: 03-79492306, Email: [email protected]

Corresponding author.

Collection date 2006.

INTRODUCTION

Research is the pillar of knowledge, and it constitutes an integral part of progress. In the fast-expanding field of biomedical research, this has improved the quality and quantity of life. Historically, medical doctors have been in the privileged position to carry out research, especially in clinical research which involves people. They are able to control “life and death” of patients and have free access to their confidential information. Moreover, medical researchers have also enjoyed immunity from accountability due to high public regard for science and medicine. This has resulted in some researchers conducting unethical researches. For instance, in World War II, medical doctors had conducted unethical experiments on human in the name of science, resulting in harm and even death in some cases. 1 More recently, the involvement of pharmaceutical industry in clinical trials have raised issues about how to safeguard patient’s care and to ensure the published research findings are objective. 2

In the light of these ethical controversies, the Declaration of Helsinki was established to inform biomedical researchers the principles of clinical research. 3 This declaration highlighted a tripartite guidelines for good clinical practice which include respect for the dignity of the person; research should not override the health, well-being and care of subjects; principles of justice. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) was also founded in 1997 to address the breaches of research and publication ethics. 4

How do we apply all these principles in our daily conduct of research? This paper will discuss different ethical issues in research, including study design and ethical approval, data analysis, authorship, conflict of interest and redundant publication and plagiarism. I have also included two case scenarios in this paper to illustrate common ethical issues in research and publication.

ETHICAL ISSUES IN RESEARCH

1. study design and ethics approval.

According to COPE, “good research should be well adjusted, well-planned, appropriately designed, and ethically approved. To conduct research to a lower standard may constitute misconduct.” 3 This may appear to be a stringent criterion, but it highlights the basic requirement of a researcher is to conduct a research responsibly. To achieve this, a research protocol should be developed and adhered to. It must be carefully agreed to by all contributors and collaborators, and the precise roles of each team member should be spelled out early, including matters of authorship and publications. Research should seek to answer specific questions, rather than just collect data.

It is essential to obtain approval from the Institutional Review Board, or Ethics Committee, of the respective organisations for studies involving people, medical records, and anonymised human tissues. The research proposal should discuss potential ethical issues pertaining to the research. The researchers should pay special attention to vulnerable subjects to avoid breech of ethical codes (e.g. children, prisoners, pregnant women, mentally challenged, educationally and economically disadvantaged). Patient information sheet should be given to the subjects during recruitment, detailing the objectives, procedures, potential benefits and harms, as well as rights to refuse participation in the research. Consent should be explained and obtained from the subjects or guardians, and steps should be taken to ensure confidentiality of information provided by the subjects.

2. Data analysis

It is the responsibility of the researcher to analyse the data appropriately. Although inappropriate analysis does not necessarily amount to misconduct, intentional omission of result may cause misinterpretation and mislead the readers. Fabrication and falsification of data do constitute misconduct. For example, in a clinical trial, if a drug is found to be ineffective, this study should be reported. There is a tendency for the researchers to under-report negative research findings, 5 and this is partly contributed by pressure from the pharmaceutical industry which funds the clinical trial.

To ensure appropriate data analysis, all sources and methods used to obtain and analyse data should be fully disclosed. Failure to do so may lead the readers to misinterpret the results without considering possibility of the study being underpowered. The discussion section of a paper should mention any issues of bias, and explain how they have been dealt with in the design and interpretation of the study.

3. Authorship

There is no universally agreed definition of authorship. 6 It is generally agreed that an author should have made substantial contribution to the intellectual content, including conceptualising and designing the study; acquiring, analysing and interpreting the data. The author should also take responsibility to certify that the manuscript represents valid work and take public responsibility for the work. Finally, an author is usually involved in drafting or revising the manuscript, as well as approving the submitted manuscript. Data collection, editing of grammar and language, and other routine works by itself, do not deserve an authorship.

It is crucial to decide early on in the planning of a research who will be credited as authors, as contributors, and who will be acknowledged. It is also advisable to read carefully the “Advice to Authors” of the target journal which may serve as a guide to the issue of authorship.

4. Conflicts of interest

This happens when researchers have interests that are not fully apparent and that may influence their judgments on what is published. These conflicts include personal, commercial, political, academic or financial interest. Financial interests may include employment, research funding, stock or share ownership, payment for lecture or travel, consultancies and company support for staff. This issue is especially pertinent in biomedical research where a substantial number of clinical trials are funded by pharmaceutical company.

Such interests, where relevant, should be discussed in the early stage of research. The researchers need to take extra effort to ensure that their conflicts of interest do not influence the methodology and outcome of the research. It would be useful to consult an independent researcher, or Ethics Committee, on this issue if in doubt. When publishing, these conflicts of interest should be declared to editors, and readers will judge for themselves whether the research findings are trustworthy.

5. Redundant publication and plagiarism

Redundant publication occurs when two or more papers, without full cross reference, share the same hypothesis, data, discussion points, or conclusions. However, previous publication of an abstract during the proceedings of meetings does not preclude subsequent submission for publication, but full disclosure should be made at the time of submission. This is also known as self-plagiarism. In the increasing competitive environment where appointments, promotions and grant applications are strongly influenced by publication record, researchers are under intense pressure to publish, and a growing minority is seeking to bump up their CV through dishonest means. 7

On the other hand, plagiarism ranges from unreferenced use of others’ published and unpublished ideas, including research grant applications to submission under “new” authorship of a complete paper, sometimes in different language.

Therefore, it is important to disclose all sources of information, and if large amount of other people’s written or illustrative materials is to be used, permission must be sought.

It is the duty of the researcher to ensure that research is conducted in an ethical and responsible manner from planning to publication. Researchers and authors should familiarise themselves with these principles and follows them strictly. Any potential ethical issues in research and publication should be discussed openly within the research team. If in doubt, it is advisable to consult the respective institutional review board (IRB) for their expert opinions.

Case Scenario 1:

“A community survey on prevalence of domestic violence among secondary school students.”

Who should we obtain the consent? Students, parents, teachers or Ministry of Education?

To conduct this study, we need to seek approval from the Ministry of Education and permission from the school principal. However, consent should be taken from parents, who are the legal guardians of the students.

If the results show that 50% of the students have ever been abused, should I report them to the police?

These ethical issues should be discussed at the proposal stage, and the participants/guardians should be informed about the decision to report to the police while taking the consent. This will potentially affect the response rate; but this is also the responsibility of the researcher to protect the participants and their families.

I have decided to publish it. Can I send an abstract for presentation as part of the conference proceedings, and later submit similar abstract with the full text for publication. Is that redundant publication?

Yes, you can. However, you need to declare to the publisher that you have presented the paper in the conference. Redundant publication happens when an author has submitted two papers with similar objective, methodology and results, without cross referencing.

Can I submit the same paper in a different language?

Yes, you can. However, you have to declare to the publisher that you have published an identical paper in a different language.

Case Scenario 2:

“Does HRT improve vasomotor symptoms among menopausal women in a Malaysian primary care clinic?”

Some people say it is “unethical” to do this study because it has been proven in many studies. But no such research has ever been done locally!

HRT has been proven to be effective in relieving vasomotor symptoms in many well-designed studies. It is inappropriate for the researcher to repeat an established therapy which may potentially cause harm to them (e.g. deep vein thrombosis and breast cancer). However, it is appropriate to repeat research if the researchers feel that it may yield a different outcome in the local setting based on a firm theoretical basis.

Do we still need to obtain ethics approval if it is part of daily clinical practice?

Yes, even though it is part of our normal practice, all research involving human subjects, especially when it involves drugs, should be subjected to ethics approval. (E.g. “How did the researchers ensure that they explain to the patients fully about the potential harm of HRT?”)

I’m worried that if I start explaining to the participants about the possibility of Ca breast, they won’t want to participate. How can I “play down” this possible side effect?

As mentioned earlier, it is the duty of the researcher to ensure that the participant understands the benefits and risks of the treatment. The information should be conveyed in an objectively manner in the patient information sheet. Any queries from the patient should be answered truthfully, and it is the patient’s rights to refuse to participate in the research.

While writing the introduction and discussion of my paper/thesis, I copied sentences from some papers. But I referred to them in my reference. Is that acceptable?

It is acceptable to quote sentences from a paper as long as they are duly referenced.

• 1. Human D, Fluss SS. World Medical Association; 2001. The World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: historical and contemporary perspectives. [ Google Scholar ]
• 2. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality. BMJ. 2003;326:1167–70. doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7400.1167. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 3. World Medical association. 2004. Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 4. Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) 2005. Guidelines on good publication and the Code of Conduct. [ Google Scholar ]
• 5. Smith R. Medical journals are an extension of the marketing arm of pharmaceutical companies. PLoS Med. 2005;2:100–2. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020138. [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• 6. Medical Research Council. London: MRC; 1998. MRC Guidelines for good clinical practice in clinical trials. [ Google Scholar ]
• 7. Giles J. Taking on the cheats. Nature. 2005;435:258–9. doi: 10.1038/435258a. [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• PDF (104.6 KB)
• Collections

Similar articles

Cited by other articles, links to ncbi databases.

• Download .nbib .nbib
• Format: AMA APA MLA NLM

Add to Collections

Annual Review of Ethics Case Studies

What are research ethics cases.

For additional information, please visit Resources for Research Ethics Education

Research Ethics Cases are a tool for discussing scientific integrity. Cases are designed to confront the readers with a specific problem that does not lend itself to easy answers. By providing a focus for discussion, cases help staff involved in research to define or refine their own standards, to appreciate alternative approaches to identifying and resolving ethical problems, and to develop skills for dealing with hard problems on their own.

Research Ethics Cases for Use by the NIH Community

• Theme 24 – Using AI in Research and Ethical Conduct of Clinical Trials (2024)
• Theme 23 – Authorship, Collaborations, and Mentoring (2023)
• Theme 22 – Use of Human Biospecimens and Informed Consent (2022)
• Theme 21 – Science Under Pressure (2021)
• Theme 20 – Data, Project and Lab Management, and Communication (2020)
• Theme 19 – Civility, Harassment and Inappropriate Conduct (2019)
• Theme 18 – Implicit and Explicit Biases in the Research Setting (2018)
• Theme 17 – Socially Responsible Science (2017)
• Theme 16 – Research Reproducibility (2016)
• Theme 15 – Authorship and Collaborative Science (2015)
• Theme 14 – Differentiating Between Honest Discourse and Research Misconduct and Introduction to Enhancing Reproducibility (2014)
• Theme 13 – Data Management, Whistleblowers, and Nepotism (2013)
• Theme 12 – Mentoring (2012)
• Theme 11 – Authorship (2011)
• Theme 10 – Science and Social Responsibility, continued (2010)
• Theme 9 – Science and Social Responsibility - Dual Use Research (2009)
• Theme 8 – Borrowing - Is It Plagiarism? (2008)
• Theme 7 – Data Management and Scientific Misconduct (2007)
• Theme 6 – Ethical Ambiguities (2006)
• Theme 5 – Data Management (2005)
• Theme 4 – Collaborative Science (2004)
• Theme 3 – Mentoring (2003)
• Theme 2 – Authorship (2002)
• Theme 1 – Scientific Misconduct (2001)

For Facilitators Leading Case Discussion

For the sake of time and clarity of purpose, it is essential that one individual have responsibility for leading the group discussion. As a minimum, this responsibility should include:

• Reading the case aloud.
• Defining, and re-defining as needed, the questions to be answered.
• Encouraging discussion that is “on topic”.
• Discouraging discussion that is “off topic”.
• Keeping the pace of discussion appropriate to the time available.
• Eliciting contributions from all members of the discussion group.
• Summarizing both majority and minority opinions at the end of the discussion.

How Should Cases be Analyzed?

Many of the skills necessary to analyze case studies can become tools for responding to real world problems. Cases, like the real world, contain uncertainties and ambiguities. Readers are encouraged to identify key issues, make assumptions as needed, and articulate options for resolution. In addition to the specific questions accompanying each case, readers should consider the following questions:

• Who are the affected parties (individuals, institutions, a field, society) in this situation?
• What interest(s) (material, financial, ethical, other) does each party have in the situation? Which interests are in conflict?
• Were the actions taken by each of the affected parties acceptable (ethical, legal, moral, or common sense)? If not, are there circumstances under which those actions would have been acceptable? Who should impose what sanction(s)?
• What other courses of action are open to each of the affected parties? What is the likely outcome of each course of action?
• For each party involved, what course of action would you take, and why?
• What actions could have been taken to avoid the conflict?

Is There a Right Answer?

Acceptable solutions.

Most problems will have several acceptable solutions or answers, but it will not always be the case that a perfect solution can be found. At times, even the best solution will still have some unsatisfactory consequences.

Unacceptable Solutions

While more than one acceptable solution may be possible, not all solutions are acceptable. For example, obvious violations of specific rules and regulations or of generally accepted standards of conduct would typically be unacceptable. However, it is also plausible that blind adherence to accepted rules or standards would sometimes be an unacceptable course of action.

Ethical Decision-Making

It should be noted that ethical decision-making is a process rather than a specific correct answer. In this sense, unethical behavior is defined by a failure to engage in the process of ethical decision-making. It is always unacceptable to have made no reasonable attempt to define a consistent and defensible basis for conduct.

This page was last updated on Friday, July 26, 2024

Ethical Action in Global Research

Case examples.

• Global Research
• Ethical Stories

In reviewing case studies and examples brought to our workshops by researchers, it is clear that:

Ethical issues in global research are extremely complex.

Solutions are rarely simple or perfect. They need to be contextually relevant if they are to work.

It may be that a ‘fully worked’ solution is not clear but that parts of the solution will give enough traction to begin a process of resolution.

Different individuals and different groups often come to different conclusions. Both may follow a principled stance but make different justifiable choices at a number of decision-making points. Some solutions might be a better fit for different research teams, depending on the skills and expertise of each member.

Ethical decision making is more than following a set of rules. It should be about being open to exploring a range of possibilities, each of which may be ethical but may have different implications and may have different pragmatic constraints. 

Ethical issues emerge across all stages of the research journey and may change over time. 

Helpful questions in finding a solution include:

                     - What might have pre-empted the issue (this is relevant to future proofing)?

                     - What were the early warning signs?

                     - How could key issues be assessed once they have arisen?

                     - What should be the immediate response?

                     - What should be the follow-up response at each subsequent stage of the research journey?

Case Analysis Template

We have developed a template to help your team analyse ethical conflicts and look for solutions. This template highlights the importance of considering all phases of the research journey. It also highlights the importance of considering Place, People, Principles and Precedent both in the analysis and in the search for solutions.

Please see the case examples below. We do not claim that these examples are applicable to different contexts. We know that ethical conflicts need to be analyzed according to their own context. What works in one place can be disastrous in another.

Case Study 1

• Read more about Case Study 1

Case Study 2 and 3 (Paper: COVID-19)

In this paper we offered two case analyses  to exemplify the utility of the toolkit as a flexible and dynamic tool to promote ethical research in the context of COVID-19.

The paper was published as: Clara Calia , Corinne Reid , Cristóbal Guerra , Abdul-Gafar Oshodi , Charles Marley , Action Amos , Paulina Barrera & Liz Grant (2020): Ethical challenges in the COVID-19 research context: a toolkit for supporting analysis and resolution, Ethics & Behavior, DOI: 10.1080/10508422.2020.1800469 

• Read more about Case Study 2 and 3 (Paper: COVID-19)

Case Study 4: Facing an ethical breach

• Read more about Case Study 4: Facing an ethical breach

Case Study 5: Protecting vulnerable groups (in English and Spanish)

Case 5 (en Español)    Case 5

• Read more about Case Study 5: Protecting vulnerable groups (in English and Spanish)

Case Study 6: Data interpretation and consent

• Read more about Case Study 6: Data interpretation and consent

Case Study 7: Consent

• Read more about Case Study 7: Consent

Case Study 8: Research project development and engaging communities

• Read more about Case Study 8: Research project development and engaging communities

Share this page