Research Ethics and Basic Ethical Theories

1
Research Ethicsand Basic Ethical Theories

• Tools for reflection on and evaluation of
  educational research (?)
• Jon Magne Vestøl
• Department of Teacher Education and School
  Development

2
Status and challenge

• Research Ethics characteristics
• Concrete level Normative, undisputed rules
  (guidelines or commandments)
• Meta level Historical surveys and reflections on
  specific topics
• Historical development driven by major research
  accidents.
• The challenge
• Lack of theory based tools/concepts suitable for
  critical examination of a research process and
  research report.

3
Outline

• 3 cases
• Map of four ethical perspectives
• Short presentation of each perspective
• Ethical perspectives and cases

4
Case 1

• Research project Identity constructions among
  2nd generation Pakistan-Norwegian teen age girls
• Method Interview study
• Aspect of interest Contact with potential
  informants who live secret double lives
• Ethical conflict
• Important information for authorities and
  scientific community. Potential publicity for
  researcher.
• Danger of identification as result of rumors and
  media focus

5
Case 2

• Research project Evaluation strategies among
  secondary school science teachers
• Method Interview and observation
• Aspect of interest Mapping ideological
  positions, from positivism to constructivism
• Ethical conflict
• Importance of research topic displaying a
  specter of positions among teachers
• Anonymous informants recognizable among own
  colleges. Risk of portraying teachers as
  ideologically out of time.

6
Case 3

• Research project Evaluation of an education
  program developed for the promotion of students
  participation in secondary school democracy.
• Method Survey study
• Aspect of interest Significant differences
  between schools. One school with particularly
  poor results.
• Ethical conflict
• Important knowledge for policy makers major
  factors of influence.
• Vulnerable anonymity of school with poor results.
  Leaving out characteristics make results less
  valuable.

7
RELATION
Four main traditions
Are basic aspects of trust maintained?Are all
affected persons seen and heard?
(Add-ons from developmental educational
research)
Levinas
Løgstrup
Gilligan
Noddings
closenessperson
Aristoteles
Mill
MacIntyre
Bentham
Hare
Values
VIRTUE
CONSEQUENCE
Are the actions duly motivated? Are the actions
likely to form a character (individually or
collectively) of virtue (or vice)?
Do the actions have positive results (produce the
maximum common best)?
distancematter
DUTY/PRINCIPLES
Kant
Habermas
Rawls
Kohlberg
Are the actions in accordance with basic moral
principles (justice)?
8
An African Perspective?(Source Wikipedia)
Ethno-philosophy Traditional wisdomEmotions
instead of logic
Persons ?
Philosophical sagacity The reflections of the
sages
National-ideological philosophy
Ideas ?
Professional philosophyKawaida identity as
dialog with African cultures
9
Ethics of principles/duties

• Immanuel Kant
• The categorical imperative
• Act only according to that maxim whereby you can
  at the same time will that it should become a
  universal law
• Act in such a way that you treat humanity,
  whether in your own person or in the person of
  any other, always at the same time as an end and
  never merely as a means to an end
• Jürgen Habermas
• Discourse ethics The force of the better
  argument
• John Rawls
• Overlapping consensus
• Unbiased justice ethical judgments independent
  of contextual circumstances. (Theveil of
  ignorance)
• Kohlberg the superiority of the universal
  perspective (not the particular and relational)
• Relevance for research ethics
• Research as a conduct of universal principles
  securing all participators mutual strength and
  balanced influence in a rational discourse.
• Critical questions
• Unbiased rationality ideal or deception?
  (Positivism in disguise?)
• Rationality overriding relation? (Patriarchal
  power in disguise?)
• Universal or Western principles? (Cultural
  imperialism in disguise?)

Kant
Habermas
Rawls
Kohlberg
10
Ethics of consequences (utilitarian perspective)

• Jeremy Bentham
• Calculations of lust (quantitative evaluation)
• John Stuart Mill
• Utilitarian perspective actions that promote the
  common best (qualitative evaluation)
• Richard Hare
• Utilitarian perspective focusing on preferences
  actions that fulfill the wishes of the parts
  involved
• Relevance for research ethics
• The consequences of the research process and of
  the presentation of the research.
• Critical perspectives
• Individualism versus collective view (researcher,
  institution, local community, global community?)
• Analysis quantity and quality, how to measure
  the results
• Definition of values (who define the common
  best the researcher, the employer, the
  community?)

Bentham
Mill
Hare
11
Ethics of relations/care

• Søren Løgstrup
• The moral challenge trust implies responsibility
  and power
• Emanuel Levinas
• The absolute challenge of the Face of the Other
• Løgstrup and Levinas The asymmetric relation
• Being totally handed over (utleverthet)
• A one sided challenge (ensidig fordring) care
  without any promise of reward
• Gilligan and Noddings care as a basic ethical
  value
• Relevance for research ethics
• The vulnerable position of informants
• Critical perspectives
• Is the challenge undisputable (ontological
  status)?
• Should the relational individual override the
  interests of organizations and society?

Løgstrup
Levinas
Gilligan
Noddings
12
Ethics of virtues

• Aristotle
• Good deeds are based in a good character the joy
  of doing the right
• Alasdair MacIntyre
• Critical evaluation of ethical individualism
• Virtues based in community practice
• Examples justice, courage, honesty
• Relevance for research ethics
• The implications of research for individual and
  societal virtues (or vices)
• Critical questions
• Research virtues as mirror of virtues of society,
  or a sort of higher standard?
• Individual virtues or community virtues
  (researcher and research community)?
• Could embodied/internalized research virtues
  compromise ideals of impartiality?

Aristoteles
MacIntyre
13
Research ethics - check listFrom Forskningsetisk
veileder, published by Den nasjonale
forskningsetiske komité for naturvitenskap og
teknologi (NENT) i 1992

• 1. The goals and methods of the project
• Do the project contradict generally accepted
  values? (Manipulation, environment disturbance,
  military implications, violation of animal
  protection etc.) (Universal principles?)
• 2. The rights of participants/informants
• Informed and independent consent. (Universal
  principles?)
• 3. Data displaying personal information
• Anonymity to protect the security of
  participants. (Universal principles and
  relations?)
• 4. Risk and security
• Risk of damage to humans, animals or nature known
  and accepted? (Universal principles, consequences
  and relations?)
• 5. Whistle-blowing built in warning system
• Will it be possible for participants to raise
  objections and will the objections be treated by
  an independent body? (Universal principles and
  relations?)
• (Lecturers comments on possible implicit
  perspectives. Be also aware of implicit values.)

14
Cases revisited
15
Case 1

• Research project Identity constructions among
  2nd generation Pakistan-Norwegian teen age girls
• Method Interview study
• Aspect of interest Contact with potential
  informants who live secret double lives
• Ethical conflict
• Important information for authorities and
  scientific community. Potential publicity for
  researcher.
• Danger of identification as result of rumors and
  media focus
• Lecturers comments
• Relations care for informants versus neglect of
  informants
• Duties/principles individual right versus truth?
• Consequences individual goods versus needs of
  society
• Virtues compassion versus neglect?

16
Case 2

• Research project Evaluation strategies of
  secondary school science teachers
• Method Interview and observation
• Aspect of interest Mapping ideological
  positions, from positivism to constructivism
• Ethical conflict
• Importance of displaying a specter of positions
  among teachers
• Anonymous informants recognizable among own
  colleges. Risk of portraying teachers as
  ideologically out of date.
• Lecturers comments
• Relations care for informants versus neglect of
  informants
• Duties/principles individual right versus search
  for truth?
• Consequences individual goods versus valuable
  information
• Virtues compassion versus neglect?

17
Case 3

• Research project Evaluation of education program
  to stimulate students participation in secondary
  school democracy.
• Method Survey study
• Aspect of interest Significant differences
  between schools. One school with particularly
  poor results.
• Ethical conflict
• Important knowledge for policy makers major
  factors of influence.
• Vulnerable anonymity of school with poor results.
  Leaving out characteristics make results less
  valuable.
• Lecturers comments
• Relations care for informants versus neglect of
  informants
• Duties/principles individual right versus search
  for truth
• Consequences individuals versus society
• Virtues compassion versus neglect

18
Additional info
19
Research Ethics Guidelines for social science,
humanistic studies, law studies and theology

• 1. The basic values of research
• Research should accept common principles like
  honesty and integrity, impartiality and awareness
  of own fallability.
• 2. The role of research for society, culture and
  language
• Research should be conducted to the benefit of
  society
• 3. The importance of independent research
• Institutions should respect and promote
  independent research and not restrict
  controversial research
• 4. Promotion and enforcement of principles of
  research ethics
• An obligation for institutions and individual
  researchers.

20
Research and individuals

• 5. Respect for human dignity and human rights
• 6. Respect for the integrity, autonomy and
  cooperation of informants
• 7. Protection of participants from danger and
  damage
• 8. Respect for participants right of proper
  information about the purpose, methods and
  financial sources.
• 9. Respect for participants right to free and
  informed consent.
• 10. Respect for the rules of registration and
  permission to handle personal information.
• 11. Awareness of the possible consequences for
  third parts
• 12. Awareness of the particular rights of
  children.
• 13. Respect for participants privacy
• 14. Respect for the principle of confidentiality
• 15. Awareness of restrictions concerning reuse of
  personal information
• 16. Principles of proper storage and time limits
  for storage.
• 17. Restrictions concerning research on people
  who are no longer alive.
• 18. Respect for peoples values and attitudes.
• 19. Information about the limitations of the
  results and the role of the researcher

21
Research and institutions

• 20. Paying respect to the legitimate secrecy of
  institutions.
• 21. Public institutions should be open to
  research
• 22. Paying respect to vulnerable groups
• 23. The researcher should maintain independence
• 24. The researcher should respect the protection
  of cultural heritage
• 25. Research in foreign cultures demands
  particular awareness
• 26. Respect for cultural differences should be
  balanced against the limitations defined by human
  rights

22
Research and the research society

• 27. Pay respect to scientific integrity
• 28. No accept of plagiarism
• 29. Decent use of references
• 30. Making research data available for further
  research
• 31. Evaluations should be fair and unbiased
• 32. Cooperation should contribute to fair and
  (self)critical research communities
• 33. Students and their work should not be misused
  for scientific or personal purposes
• 34. Supervisors and project leaders should not
  ignore ethical aspects of the project

23
Research on demand

• 35. There should be a balance between different
  kinds of research
• 36. Public and private Styring av
  forskningsoppdrag
• Både offentlige og private oppdragsgivere har en
  legitim rett til å fastsette rammene for
• forskningsoppdrag, så lenge de ikke er i strid
  med de øvrige krav som stilles til forskningen.
• Det fritar imidlertid ikke forskerne og
  forskningsinstitusjonene for medansvar for de
  avtaler
• som de inngår med oppdragsgivere.
• 37. Forskningsinstitusjonene og den enkelte
  forsker
• Forskere som inngår i større forskningsprosjekter
  har et medansvar for de prosjektene han
• eller hun er med på. Den enkelte forskers bidrag
  i forskningsprosjektet bør gjøres klart.
• 38. Forskeres og forskningsinstitusjoners
  uavhengighet
• Forskere og forskningsinstitusjoner skal sørge
  for å opprettholde uavhengighet i forhold til
• oppdragsgiver.
• 39. Informasjon om finansiering av forskning
• Det påligger både oppdragsgivere og forskere å
  gjøre offentlig kjent hvem som finansierer
• forskningen.
• 40. Bruk av forskningsresultatene
• Både oppdragsgivere og forskere har et ansvar for
  å hindre at resultatene av forskningen
• fremstilles på en misvisende måte. Det er uetisk
  å avgrense emnet for forskningen med sikte
• på å få frem særlig ønskelige resultater, eller
  fremstille resultatene fra forskningen på en

24
Forskningsformidling

• 42. Formidling som faglig oppgave
• Spesialiserte forskningsmiljøer skal sørge for at
  vitenskapelig kunnskap formidles til et
• bredere publikum utenfor forskningsmiljøet.
• 43. Krav til individer og institusjoner
• Det påligger forskningsinstitusjonene å legge
  forholdene til rette for en mangfoldig og
• omfattende forskningsformidling, preget av
  kvalitet og relevans.44. Tverrfaglig diskusjon og
  demokratisk allmennhet
• En viktig del av forskningsformidlingen i et
  moderne samfunn bør bestå i gjensidig
  popularisering
• (oversettelse) mellom spesialister fra
  forskjellige forskningsområder.
• 45. Deltakelse i samfunnsdebatt og ansvar for
  hvordan forskning tolkes
• Forskere bør bidra til det offentlige ordskifte
  med vitenskapsbasert argumentasjon.
• 46. Formidling og etterrettelighet
• Kravet om etterrettelighet er like sterkt ved
  forskningsformidling som ved forskningspublisering
  .
• 47. Krav om å tilbakeføre forskningsresultater
• Forskeren har en spesiell forpliktelse til å
  tilbakeføre forskningsresultatene til deltakerne,
• i en forståelig og forsvarlig form.