AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY

DISTANCE LEARNING CENTRE ABU, ZARIA

MASTERS IN INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AND DIPLOMACY (MIAD)

NAME: MARYAM KABIR SANI

MATRIC NO: P21DLPS80267

COURSE CODE: MIAD 801

COURSE TITTLE: METHOD AND LOGIC OF POLITICAL INQUIRY

LECTURER: PROF JAMES KANTIOK

QUESTION
1. DISCUSS THE ETHICAL ISSUES IN REAEARCH THAT RELATES
TO THT RESEARCHER?
2. WHY DOES RESEARCH WITH HUMAN PATICIPANTS REQUIRE
ETHICAL APPROVAL?
3. HOW CAN A RESEARCHER ADHERE TO ETHICS OF THE
FOLLING TERMS WHILE CONDUCTING A RESEARCH: DESIGN,
SAMPLE, DATA COLLECTION,UNFORESEEN NEEDS?

AUGUST, 2022

1
INTRODUCTION

Research is a collective and systematic search for new knowledge using different scientific

methods. Research has intrinsic value as a source of new and better insights, and it is useful to

society in various capacities. The purpose of research ethics is to promote free, reliable, and

responsible research. Research ethics contributes to fostering good scientific practice.

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.

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.

3. Authorship

There is no universally agreed definition of authorship. 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

2
take responsibility to certify that the manuscript represents valid work and take public

responsibility for the work.

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.

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.

WHY DO THE RESEARCHER WITH HUMAN PARTICIPATION REQUIRES

ETHICAL APPROVAL

If you plan to apply for ethical approval for research involving human participants or personal

data from one of the University’s research ethics committees their applications forms and local

guidance will help you to understand what to include in your application and what issues need to

be addressed.

The information requested by your local committee will depend on your discipline and the type

of research that you intend to undertake. There are, however, some core issues that ethics

committees will normally expect you to have addressed as part of your application:

Respecting autonomy

3
Wherever possible, ethics committees will expect you to demonstrate that you intend to respect

the autonomy of individuals involved in your research. Normally this will include Providing

research participants with sufficient information to make an informed decision as to whether to

take part in research (informed consent);

Ensuring that participants are not subject to coercion to take part or penalty for not taking part;

Ensuring that participants are, and are aware that they are, free to withdraw from the research at

any time without giving a reason and without a prejudice; Protecting and respecting personal

data provided by participants through rigorous and appropriate procedures for confidentiality and

anonymisation.

Maximising benefit

Ethics committees will expect you to show that your research is worthwhile and will have

beneficial effects that outweigh the risks posed by the project (see below). The recipient of the

benefit will vary from project to project, but may include, among others, society, science,

scholarship, health, and/or the participant themselves. The potential benefits of research should

be presented realistically and not be exaggerated.

ADHERENTS TO THE RESEARCH ETHICS IN TERMS OF RESEARCH DESIGN,

SAMPLE, DATA COLLECTION AND UNFORESEEN NEEDED

While quantitative/statistical analysis, when used properly, could yield powerful information to

support one’s theoretical claims, improper use of such technique could ultimately challenge the

integrity of the quantitative method as well as the research being conducted. Without proper

4
precautions, statistics can lead to misunderstanding as well as intentional misrepresentation and

manipulation of the findings.

One of the most important facts to consider when applying the quantitative method to one’s

research, is to make sure that the principle of objectivity, which is at the heart of the scientific

method, is reflected in practice (Johnson, Reynolds, and Mycoff 2015). In other words, in

addition to presenting the information in an objective manner as possible, one must ensure that

all relevant information in interpreting the results is also accessible to the readers as well. The

implication of this principle in practice is that not only should a researcher provide access to data

used in a research project but also explain the process of how one has reached the conclusion that

is presented in the research. This resonates with the current discourse on data access and research

transparency in the political science discipline.

The most recent work on data access and research transparency in political science discipline

were borne out of the concerns amongst practitioners that scholars were unable to replicate a

significant proportion of research produced in top journals. In order for the discipline to advance

knowledge across different subfields of political science and different methodological

approaches, the principle of data sharing and research transparency became ever relevant in the

discourse of the discipline. The idea is that evidence-informed knowledge needs to be accessible

by the members of other research community whose research may rely on different

methodological approaches. As a result of the growing concerns about the lack of norms of data

sharing and research transparency culture amongst practitioners of various methodological

communities and substantive subfield, the American Political Science Association (APSA), the

national professional organization for political scientists, have produced an ethics guideline to

5
ensure that the discipline as a whole can advance the data sharing and research transparency

culture and practice.

The recently updated ethics guidelines published by APSA which is mentioned in (Lupia and

Elman 2014) states that “researchers have an ethical obligation to facilitate the evaluation of their

evidence-based knowledge claims through data access, production transparency, and analytic

transparency so the at their work can be tested and replicated”. According to this document,

quantitatively oriented research must meet the three prongs of research ethics: data access,

production transparency, and analytical transparency. When conducting quantitative political

research, all three needs to be incorporated for it to be considered meeting the ethical standard.

First, researchers must ensure data accessibility. Researchers should clearly reference the data

used in their work, and if the data used were originally generated, collected, and/or compiled by

the researcher, she should provide access to them. This is a practice already adopted by many

journals where the condition of publication of an article is to provide access to data used in the

manuscript. Some researchers include code and commands used in various statistical software,

such as Stata, SAS, and R, so that one can replicate the published work.

Second, researchers need to practice production transparency. Not only should the researcher

share the data themselves, but she also needs to provide a full account of the procedures used in

the generation and collection of the data. First and foremost, this principle provides safeguards

against unethical practice of misrepresenting or inventing data. One of the most famous recent

cases of data fraud in political science research perhaps is the case involving Michael LaCour

(Konnikova 2015). He completely fabricated the data he and his co-author Donald Green used in

their research where many political scientists thought was miraculous findings. Only when two

6
UC Berkeley grad students, David Broockman and Josh Kalla, tried to replicate the study and

contacted the firm that LaCour supposedly used in the collection of the survey data, it was

revealed that LaCour completely made up the “survey data” the authors used in their research.

CONCLUSION

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.

REFERENCES

Babbie, E. (2010). The practice of social research (12th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Creswell, JW. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design Choosing Among Five

Traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research

process. London: Sage.

Esterberg, K. G. (2002). Qualitative methods in social research. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

Denzin, NK and Creswell, J.D. (1978). Mixed Methods Research Designs in Counseling

Psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2005, Vol.52, No.

2,224.http://www.preciousheart.net.

7
Schutt, R. K. (2012). Investigating the social world: The process and practice of research.

Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Sheppard, V.A., & Fennell, D. A. (2019, August). Progress in public sector tourism policy:

Toward an ethic for non-human animals. Tourism Management, 73, 134-142.