Session 2

Understanding Ethics in Social Research

Responsible conduct of research

Responsible conduct of research (RCR) is defined as "the practice of scientific

investigation with integrity."
It involves the awareness and application of established professional norms and
ethical principles in the performance of all activities related to scientific research.

The term ethics derives from the Greek word ethos, meaning “character.”
Introduction

• What moral principles guide your research?

• How do ethical issues influence your selection of a research problem?
• How do ethical issues affect how you conduct your research—the design of
your study, your sampling procedure, and so on?
• What responsibility do you have toward your research subjects? For example,
do you have their informed consent to participate in your project?
• What ethical issues/dilemmas might come into play in deciding what research
findings you publish?
• Will your research directly benefit those who participated in the study?
Four major principles for research ethics

1. Discuss intellectual property frankly

2. Be conscious of multiple roles
3. Follow informed-consent rules
4. Respect confidentiality and privacy
Scenario 1: Data (Re)use

You just got off a long conference call with your research team devoted to
designing your next data collection effort. After careful thought, you were able to
design an effort that will net you data for three different papers. Provided there
is no overlap among the variables across the studies, no harm, no foul, right?
What if just the control variables over- lap? What if the variables overlap, but
none of the relationships studied do? Still OK? Regardless of whether there is
overlap between the studies, do you tell the editor to whom you submit a paper
from this data set that you have used it before?
Scenario 2: Coauthors

We've all been there - worked on a project with a coauthor who did not hold up
his/her end of the bargain. What did you do? Move him or her down in order of
authorship? Bump him or her off the paper? Did you undertake either of these
actions without first discussing it with the coauthor? Per- haps you gave the
nonparticipating coauthor a deadline contingent on continued authorship that
you knew she/he could not meet. How about add- ing a coauthor without getting
the permission of those already on the paper? Have you submitted a paper to a
journal or conference without all of the authors being aware of your actions? Or
perhaps you have experienced one or more of these situations.
Source:
https://www.apa.org/science/lead
ership/students/authorship-deter
mination-scorecard.pdf
Scenario 3: Reporting Results

You have just finished cleaning a data set that you have spent months
collecting. You run first set of analyses and realize that the p-value for the key
relationship is .056. Do you round down? What if the SEM model doesn't fit? Do
you implement the suggestions offered in the modification indexes? If you do,
do you report the modifications you made in the paper? What if the beta is
significant in your regression analysis, but the overall step in which the beta is
located is not? Do you report the beta and not mention the fact that the overall
model was not significant? Have you ever published a paper that uses co-
owned data without the co-owners knowledge?
References

• Ali, S., & Kelly, M. (2004). Ethics and social research. Researching society
and culture, 2, 116-127
• Bird, S.J., Gemes, K., Retallick, G., & Peters, D.N. (2014). Social
Responsibility and Research Ethics : Not Either/Or but Both. Case(s) (if
applicable)
• https://www.apa.org/science/leadership/students/authorship-determination-sco
recard.pdf
• K. Michele Kacmar, 2009: From the Editors: An Ethical Quiz. AMJ, 52, 432–
434, https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2009.41330319