Chapter 4: Research Ethics. CONTENT Institutional oversight of research ethics Ethics in the...

Chapter 4: Research Ethics

CONTENT• Institutional oversight of research ethics• Ethics in the research process• Ethical issues in research• Honesty/rigour in analysis, interpretation and

reporting• Authorship and acknowledgements• Access to research information

A. J. Veal & S. Darcy (2014) Research Methods for Sport Studies and Sport Management: A practical guide. London: Routledge

Institutional oversight of research ethics

• University/hospital Research Committees– Oversight of all research involving humans and animals

• All research proposals must be vetted by the Committee + report submitted at conclusion of the research

• Research Councils (grant-giving bodies) also have ethics committees

• Problems of disciplinary and methodological bias in ethics committee members (Lincoln)

• Some professional bodies have research ‘codes of ethics’


Ethics in the research process

• Issues:• Social benefit - will research benefit society?• Researcher competence – are researchers qualified/

experienced?• Free choice – are subjects participating freely?• Informed consent – are subjects sufficiently informed to give

consent to participate?• Risk of harm to the subject – what are the risks of harm?


Relevance in stages of the research process (Fig. 4.1)

Ethical issue Design/ org.

Collection Analysis etc.

Store data

during

Report Store data after

Social benefit ●

Researcher competence ●

Subjects' freedom of choice ●

Subjects' informed consent ●

Risk of harm to subjects – anonymous

●

Risk of harm to subjects – identifiable

● ● ● ● ●

Honesty/rigour in analysis/ interpretation

●

Honesty/rigour in reporting ●


Examples in sport research (Case study 4.1)

• Donne: an experienced kayak/canoe instructor and competitor poses as an ‘enthusiastic learner’ in order to conduct research at an outdoor adventure centre.

• Jones et al.: Autobiographical research by an elite athlete with negative comments on his coach: although the coach is not named is his/her identity obvious to those in the field?


General example of unethical conduct

• Push Polling• Typically political, used in marginal constituencies.• Telephone survey interviewees asked their opinion on

hypothetical, but misleading statements about a candidate.• Survey results are not the payoff: the aim is to spread

misleading rumours about the opponent via the survey interview.

• Highlights the issue of the ‘leading question’.


Researcher competence

• Unqualified/inexperienced or poorly supervised researchers run the risk of:

• wasting the resources of the funding organisation;• wasting the time of subjects;• abusing the goodwill of subjects;• misleading the users of the research results; and/or• damaging the reputation of the research organisation.


Free choice

• Subjects should not be coerced to take part in research.

• Grey areas:– Captive groups (eg. students)– Children (role of ‘responsible adult’)– Official government surveys (eg. national census)– Observation– Participant observation


Informed consent

• Subjects should be full informed about the nature and risks of the research


Information for subjects (Fig. 4.2)

1. Name of organisation conducting the research2. Purpose of the research3. Sponsoring/funding organisation if applicable4. Participants and how they are being selected5. What is required from participants:

– nature of involvement (interviews, focus groups, etc.)– time required for each session– number of sessions– time-period over which sessions will take place

6. Any risks to the participant7. Voluntary nature of participation8. Right of participant to refuse to answer any questions or withdraw at any

stage without giving reasons9. Privacy and security of data10. Ways in which data will be used11. Contact details for research project supervisor


Subjects’ consent form (Fig. 4.3)• University of xxxxxxx, School of Sport Management• Sport participation research project: CONSENT FORM• I confirm that I have read and understood the research project

information sheet for the ' Sport participation research project' and have had any questions answered to my satisfaction

• I understand that my participation in the study is entirely voluntary and I may cease to take part at any time without giving reasons.

• I agree to take part in the study as described in the information sheet.• I agree to interviews/discussion sessions being recorded.• I agree that anonymous quotations from interviews/discussions may be

used in publications.

• Name: _________________________ Date: ____________

• Signature: _________________


Verbal consent

• Verbal consent is adequate in many sport surveys, when the survey:– is anonymous,– involves only a short interview (e.g. 3 or 4 minutes),– involves fairly innocuous, non-personal questions,– and/or takes place at a facility/site with the agreement of

the management or authorities.

• Ethics guidelines for such surveys: see below


Risk of harm to the subject

• Main risk in social research: privacy issues: identification of subjects


Personally identifiable data (Fig. 4.4)

Research Method Postal survey – quantitativeWho is identified? Sampled members of general

public or of organisationsIdentifying information Names and addressesWhy identify? Intrinsic to methodIssue arises in storage or publication?

Storage

Methods to reduce risk List of names and addresses kept separate from questionnaires and destroyed at end of data collection

For other examples, see Fig. 4.4


Ethics guidelines for anonymous surveys (Fig. 4.5)

1. Interviewer identifying badge2. Full briefing of interviewers3. Brief description on ‘handout’ questionnaire +

additional info./telephone contact4. Brief oral introduction5. Telephone nos. of supervisors available6. Short printed handout available7. Respondents should not be pressured.


Honesty/rigour in analysis, interpretation and reporting

• Falsification of results is unethical• Problem of ‘outliers’• ‘Negative findings’– Limited sample size may produce negative

findings, but cumulatively, the research may be useful (see ‘meta-analysis’ Ch. 6)


Authorship & acknowledgements

• All who contribute to writing and creative/ intellectual work of the project should be included as authors, in appropriate order.

• Others who have assisted/contributed may be acknowledged, by name or collectively.

• Plagiarism – use of others’ data/idea etc. without acknowledgement – is unethical.


Access to data

• Since the controversies over climate change research, the question arises as to access to publicly funded research data for secondary analysis.

• Some data subject to Freedom of Information laws• Some academic journals now require raw data and

computer code to be made available on-line (see Montford, 2010)


Chapter 4: Research Ethics. CONTENT Institutional oversight of research ethics Ethics in the...

Documents

Transcript of Chapter 4: Research Ethics. CONTENT Institutional oversight of research ethics Ethics in the...