is addressing academic projects in which a researcher carries out their research in the ‘real world’. For that reason alone it is a misconception to proceed as if academic research is immune from social, cultural, and legal concerns, as if a researcher can go anywhere, do anything in the name of scientific (read: ‘objective’) knowledge. History, past and quite recent, shows how such an approach, especially when backed by a particular worldview, military might, or the ‘rights’ of imperial conquest, has left its own legacy. 9
Over the last fifty years or so this assumption has been significantly revised; under the aegis of international human rights, intellectual property rights covenants, and also notions of corporate social responsibility , codes of ethics are now integral to doing research in private and public sectors. The statement below encapsulates the underlying principle as one of socially responsible research , one that is echoed in institutional and professional codes and guidelines around the world:
Social researchers must strive to be aware of the intrusive potential of their work. They have no special entitlement to study all phenomena. The advancement of knowledge and the pursuit of information are not themselves sufficient justifications for overriding social and other cultural values.
(Social Research Association 2003: 25–6)
How this principle is developed and enforced as mandatory and recommended codes of research conduct is a large area of philosophical debate in itself. It takes many forms, from lecture modules to simple or complex ethics forms that researchers are expected to complete and submit for approval at a certain stage in their project. It also underscores increasing levels of documentation researchers now need to complete when applying for research funding or gaining permission to access funding from their institutions. The oversight resides in guidelines as well as committees, who take a hands-off or hands-on approach accordingly.
Two points bear noting straightaway:
In practical terms ethical issues arising either when designing or carrying out research, legal as well as more sociocultural sensitive issues (copyright permissions and access permission respectively) are largely delegated to individual institutions, if not devolved entirely to the individual researcher, in consultation with supervisors, at the end of the day.
Things are changing as things move onto the web; as human subjects take the form of avatars, simulations, or game-based creations, we see these issues further complicated for online research scenarios. Chapter 5 takes these initial points further, given the way that changes brought about by the internet in particular in terms of where and how researchers now carry out observations, interviews, or even experiments now include cyberspace (‘virtual’) domains and computer-created subjects (e.g. avatars, game characters).
This overview looks at the role played by ethical considerations in general and ethics forms in particular at the moments they exert pressure on your research plans and ambitions. All the points raised below are open to further debate within departments; indeed they are often the source of some friction in working research communities given the power some committees can wield. In theoretical terms they are also covered extensively in philosophical critiques as well as professional guidelines and discussion papers.
For the sake of argument and simplicity, I have framed the discussion as if it were a Q&A session between a (frazzled or resistant) research student and their supervisor or tutor.
Researching human subjects
So what is the point here? For the most part codes of ethics have been formulated on behalf of research subjects (people) and their production (texts, words, images). But these codes also bear the weight of varying degrees of institutional liability as well as seeking to look out for the well-being of their students and
Over the last fifty years or so this assumption has been significantly revised; under the aegis of international human rights, intellectual property rights covenants, and also notions of corporate social responsibility , codes of ethics are now integral to doing research in private and public sectors. The statement below encapsulates the underlying principle as one of socially responsible research , one that is echoed in institutional and professional codes and guidelines around the world:
Social researchers must strive to be aware of the intrusive potential of their work. They have no special entitlement to study all phenomena. The advancement of knowledge and the pursuit of information are not themselves sufficient justifications for overriding social and other cultural values.
(Social Research Association 2003: 25–6)
How this principle is developed and enforced as mandatory and recommended codes of research conduct is a large area of philosophical debate in itself. It takes many forms, from lecture modules to simple or complex ethics forms that researchers are expected to complete and submit for approval at a certain stage in their project. It also underscores increasing levels of documentation researchers now need to complete when applying for research funding or gaining permission to access funding from their institutions. The oversight resides in guidelines as well as committees, who take a hands-off or hands-on approach accordingly.
Two points bear noting straightaway:
In practical terms ethical issues arising either when designing or carrying out research, legal as well as more sociocultural sensitive issues (copyright permissions and access permission respectively) are largely delegated to individual institutions, if not devolved entirely to the individual researcher, in consultation with supervisors, at the end of the day.
Things are changing as things move onto the web; as human subjects take the form of avatars, simulations, or game-based creations, we see these issues further complicated for online research scenarios. Chapter 5 takes these initial points further, given the way that changes brought about by the internet in particular in terms of where and how researchers now carry out observations, interviews, or even experiments now include cyberspace (‘virtual’) domains and computer-created subjects (e.g. avatars, game characters).
This overview looks at the role played by ethical considerations in general and ethics forms in particular at the moments they exert pressure on your research plans and ambitions. All the points raised below are open to further debate within departments; indeed they are often the source of some friction in working research communities given the power some committees can wield. In theoretical terms they are also covered extensively in philosophical critiques as well as professional guidelines and discussion papers.
For the sake of argument and simplicity, I have framed the discussion as if it were a Q&A session between a (frazzled or resistant) research student and their supervisor or tutor.
Researching human subjects
So what is the point here? For the most part codes of ethics have been formulated on behalf of research subjects (people) and their production (texts, words, images). But these codes also bear the weight of varying degrees of institutional liability as well as seeking to look out for the well-being of their students and
Similar Books
