THE ETHICS OF EDUCATIONAL AND

SOCIAL RESEARCH

© LOUIS COHEN, LAWRENCE MANION AND

KEITH MORRISON
 STRUCTURE OF THE CHAPTER
• Informed consent, access and acceptance
• The field of ethics and sources of tension
• Voices of experience
• Ethical dilemmas
• Privacy, anonymity and confidentiality
• Against privacy, confidentiality and anonymity
• Betrayal and deception
• Ethics and evaluative research
• Research and regulation: ethical codes
and review boards
• Sponsored research
• Responsibilities to the research community
ETHICAL FOUNDATIONS
ETHICAL FOUNDATIONS
 THE COSTS–BENEFITS RATIO
Do the benefits outweigh the disadvantages?

• Social benefits of research endeavours against the

personal costs to the individuals taking part.
• Failure to do the research may cost society the
advantages of the opportunity to improve the human
condition.
• Costs to participants may include affronts to dignity,
embarrassment, loss of trust in social relations, loss of
autonomy and self-determination, and lowered self-
esteem.
• Benefits to participants may be the satisfaction in
making a contribution to science and a greater
personal understanding of the area under scrutiny.
 REGULATORY CONTEXTS OF RESEARCH
• Codes of practice, institutional review boards,
university ethics committees, legislation, ethical
frameworks and guidelines.
• Codes of ethics are designed to protect: respect for
persons, beneficence and justice.
• Ethical codes of practice are designed to protect the
interests of individuals and institutions, to ensure
suitably informed consent, and that the proposed
research abides by legal requirements and does not
violate ethical principles.

© 2018 Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison; individual chapters, the contributors
 RESEARCH AND REGULATION
Regulation comes from:
• Ethical codes (but they can be unhelpful in specific
situations);
• Review panels/committees/boards (but they may
have no more expertise or legitimacy than the
researcher, their remit is unclear, they may
disrespect researcher autonomy, and may lead to
the avoidance of sensitive research);
• Legal requirements;
• Professional associations.
 ETHICAL CODES

© 2018 Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison; individual chapters, the contributors
 ETHICAL CODES
• Research participants should take part voluntarily, free from any coercion
or undue influence, and their rights, dignity and (when possible)
autonomy should be respected and appropriately protected.
• Research should be worthwhile and provide value that outweighs any risk
or harm. Researchers should aim to maximize the benefit of the research
and minimize potential risks of harm to participants and researchers. All
potential risk of harm should be mitigated by robust precautions.
• Research staff and participants should be given appropriate information
about the purpose, methods and intended uses of the research, what
their participation in the research entails and what risks and/or benefits, if
any, are involved.
• Individual research participant and group preferences regarding
anonymity should be respected and participant requirements concerning
the confidential nature of information and personal data should be
respected.
• Research should be designed, reviewed and undertaken to ensure
recognized standards of integrity are met, and quality and transparency
are assured.
• The independence of research should be clear, and any conflicts of
interest or partiality should be explicit.
© 2018 Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison; individual chapters, the contributors
 UNICEF’S ETHICAL PRINCIPLES FOR
RESEARCH INVOLVING CHILDREN
• Ethics in research involving children is everyone’s
responsibility.
• Respecting the dignity of children is core to ethical research.
• Research involving children must be just and equitable.
• Ethical research benefits children.
• Children should never be harmed by their participation in
research.
• Research must always obtain children’s informed and
ongoing consent.
• Ethical research requires ongoing reflection.

© 2018 Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison; individual chapters, the contributors
 CONCERNS ABOUT ETHICS COMMITTEES
• They are incapable of making sound or ‘superior’ ethical decisions, such that their
work will not improve the ethical quality of research.
• The remit of ethical committees is unclear, e.g. whether to approve, prevent,
control methodology or topics.
• Ethical committees only need to be persuaded that the researcher has the ethical
capability to conduct the research, but this confuses ethical audit with ethical
decision making and confuses substance and procedures of ethical review.
• They have no legitimacy or moral superiority/expertise to control researchers, and
this is inherent in ethical principles themselves: it is researchers themselves – and
not ethics committees – who have the responsibility for the ethical conduct of
research; such responsibility cannot and should not be passed to a committee.
• Ethics committees must apply the principle of ‘informed consent’ to researchers,
and not just to those being researched.
• There is almost no evidence that researchers operate unethically apart from some
illegal cases, and so the processes of ethics committees is unnecessary.
• They lead to undesirable consequences in research: (i) the bureaucratization of
research; (ii) research will avoid sensitive, difficult or contested yet important areas
and marginalized or powerful groups, i.e. where informed consent may not be
possible; (iii) research will avoid important research areas because they may
consider it difficult to obtain the consent of the ethics committee.

© 2018 Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison; individual chapters, the contributors
ETHICS ENTER ALL STAGES OF THE RESEARCH

• Choice of topic
• Research design
• Conduct of research and data collection
• Data analysis
• Data interpretation
• Reporting and dissemination
• Evaluating the quality of the research

© 2018 Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison; individual chapters, the contributors
Ethical issues concern . . .
Beneficence/
Informed consent Access/acceptance
fiduciary trust’
Informing participants of who sees the data/report

Rights of withdrawal Rights to privacy

Respect vulnerability Human dignity/subjects

Avoid unnecessary offence Avoid unnecessary deception

Anonymity/non-traceability/confidentiality Non-maleficence

Control/ownership of data Overt/covert research

Rights to record dissent Permission from all parties

 INFORMED CONSENT
• Explain the study, its purposes, contents, benefits, any dangers or
discomforts (and long-term effects).
• Explain what is involved to the participant.
• Explain rights, protections and liabilities.
• Explain rights to voluntary non-participation/partial
participation/withdrawal.
• Explain rights and obligations of confidentiality, anonymity, non-
traceability.
• Answer any questions about the study and the procedures.
• Obtain informed consent (including, where relevant, permission from
parents/guardians and other appropriate parties), where appropriate, in
writing.
NB Justify not obtaining informed consent (e.g. for covert research).
 INFORMED CONSENT
• Should consent be an individual, family, institutional or
communitarian decision?
• Who gives consent, and for whom, for what and for how long (e.g.
longevity of data storage)?
• What constitutes ‘consent’?
• Who is competent to give consent, and on whose behalf?
• Can children override parents’ wishes?
• What pressure (deliberate or not) on people and institutions is
there to give consent?
• What does ‘voluntary’ really mean in ‘voluntary consent’?
• In whose interests is consent given or withheld?
• How is consent given in different cultures?
• How to protect vulnerable people in giving consent?
• What degree of informality and formality is appropriate in consent
giving?

© 2018 Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison; individual chapters, the contributors
 INFORMED CONSENT
• What are the possible consequences (and to whom) of consent or
non‑consent?
• How do power differentials affect consent giving?
• Is biological age of consent ‘good enough’ for giving consent?
• What are the relationships between consent and confidentiality?
• How much information is necessary to give or withhold from
participants when asking for informed consent (what does ‘fully
informed’ mean and require)?
• Should incentives be offered to gain consent?
• How can consent be addressed in covert research?
• What tensions arise in considering consent and action research
(where the researcher is the powerful teacher)?
• Is deception justified?
• How can consent be given when what happens may not be fully
known in advance of the research (e.g. in exploratory research)?
• How can consent be addressed in online research?
© 2018 Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison; individual chapters, the contributors
 INFORMED CONSENT
Informed consent requires an explanation and description of several
factors, including:
• the purposes, contents, procedures, reporting and dissemination of
the research;
• any foreseeable risks and negative outcomes, discomfort or
consequences and how they will be handled;
• benefits that might derive from the research;
• incentives to participate and rewards from participating;
• right to voluntary non-participation, withdrawal and rejoining the
project;
• rights and obligations to confidentiality and nondisclosure of the
research, participants and outcomes;
• disclosure of any alternative procedures that may be advantageous;
• opportunities for participants to ask questions about any aspect of
the research;
• signed contracts for participation (where appropriate).
© 2018 Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison; individual chapters, the contributors
 HONESTY

‘Honesty is the best policy; but he who is

governed by that maxim is not an honest
man.’

Watley, R. (1953) Apophthegms. In The Oxford

Dictionary of Quotations (2nd edn). London:
Oxford University Press.
 DECEPTION
1. Telling a lie
2. Telling only part of the truth
3. Not telling the whole story

Is deception justified, in the interests of:

• Public good?
• Preventing biasing the respondents?
• Enabling natural behaviour to be observed?
• Protecting confidentiality of a third party?
 INFORMED CONSENT

INFORMED Selection and de-selection of

CONSENT particular types of research

De-selection of less controllable,

predictable, dangerous topics, e.g.
‘denied knowledge’/power

Selection of ‘safe’, controllable,

sponsored, orthodox,
standardized, anodyne research
THE FIELD OF ETHICS
 AVOID DOING HARM: PRIMUM NON NOCERE
• Use computer simulations.
• Find a situation in which the negative effects of harm already exist, i.e. where the
research does not have the responsibility for having produced these conditions.
• Apply only a very low level of potential harm, or for only a short period of time, so
that any effects are minimal.
• Informed consent (provide details of the potential negative effects and secure
participants’ consent).
• Justify the research on the grounds that the limited harm caused is much less
than the harm caused by the existing situation (which the research is trying to
improve).
• Use samples rather than complete populations, so that fewer people are exposed
to the harm.
• Maintain the privacy of participants through the use of aggregated or anonymized
data.
 REMEMBER THE PARTICIPANTS

• Data are given, not captured.

• Thank the participants.
• Ensure that participants do not leave the research
more humiliated, insecure and alienated than when
they arrived.
• Consider the effects on the participants when writing
the report and publishing material.
• Ensure that the researchers have sufficient
competence to undertake the research.
CONTROL
PRIVACY: A MAJOR ETHICAL TENSION
SECRECY
 SECRECY FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD

‘Behind the screen of formal ethics, timorous

social scientists may excuse themselves from the
risk of confronting powerful, privileged, and
cohesive groups that wish to obscure their actions
and interests from public scrutiny.’

Mitchell, R. G. (1993) Secrecy in Fieldwork.

London: Sage Publications, p. 54.
 DILEMMAS OF PRIVACY
• What constitutes ‘private’ and ‘public’?
• What constitutes ‘personal’, and, therefore, private?
• Surveillance is everywhere.
• Data are stored without our knowledge.
• True privacy is a thing of the past.
• How to maintain anonymity, non-traceability and
confidentiality in a surveillance and recording culture?
• The greater the sensitivity of the information, the
stronger must be the safeguards called for to protect the
privacy of the participants. How to make this work?

© 2018 Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison; individual chapters, the contributors
 RECIPROCITY
• How can you give something back to those participants/
communities who helped you in the research?
• Avoid ‘rape research’: where ‘the researcher gets what they
want and then clears off, giving little or nothing in return and
maybe even causing damage’ (Lather, 1986).
• Data are ‘gifts’, not capta.
• Avoid the situation of participants who help many researchers
to become famous and get their doctorates, but leave the
participants’ quality of life with no improvement.
• Some populations are incessantly and minutely interrogated
by outside ‘experts’ and left impoverished.

© 2018 Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morrison; individual chapters, the contributors
 ETHICAL DILEMMAS
• Involving people without their knowledge or consent.
• Coercing people to participate.
• Withholding information about the true nature of the
research, or otherwise deceiving participants.
• Inducing people to commit acts diminishing their self-esteem.
• Violating rights of self-determination (e.g. in studies seeking
to promote individual change).
• Exposing participants to physical or mental stress.
• Invading their privacy.
• Withholding benefits from some participants (e.g. in
comparison groups).
• Not treating participants fairly, or with consideration, or with
respect.
• Breaching trust.
• How to avoid power and position raising ethical problems?
 ETHICAL PRINCIPLES IN ACTION RESEARCH
(Kemmis and McTaggart)
• Observe protocol and permissions.
• Involve participants.
• Negotiate with those affected.
• Report progress.
• Obtain explicit authorizations.
• Negotiate descriptions of people’s work.
• Negotiate accounts of others’ points of view.
• Obtain explicit authorization before using quotations.
• Negotiate reports for various levels of release.
• Accept responsibility for maintaining confidentiality.
• Retain the right to report your work.
• Make your principles of procedure binding and known.
 PRIVACY

• Privacy trumps other concerns in research.

• Privacy of people and settings.
• Privacy is a basic human need.
• The greater the sensitivity of the information, the
more safeguards are needed to protect the privacy of
participants.
• Privacy can be voluntarily relinquished by informed
consent.
 ANONYMITY, NON-TRACEABILITY AND
CONFIDENTIALITY

• Participants, groups, institutions, locations should be

non-traceable unless there is a good reasons for this
not to happen.
• Some individuals, groups, institutions will want to be
identified; respect this.
• It should not be possible to reconstruct or
reassemble data in order to identify people, groups,
institutions, locations, or, where it is possible, it will
not be put into the public domain.
• Researchers can take steps to guarantee that they,
too, do not know who respondents are (e.g. double
blind experiments, anonymous questionnaires).
 ANONYMITY, NON-TRACEABILITY AND
CONFIDENTIALITY
• Ensure in advance that promises of anonymity and
confidentiality can actually be kept.
• Ensure that participants understand anonymity, non-
traceability and confidentiality.
• Justify covert research.
• Justify dishonesty/telling lies to ensure non-
traceability (e.g. ‘putting people off the scent’ of
participants).
• How can ‘thick descriptions’ avoid identifying
participants/groups/institutions/locations?
 BETRAYAL AND DECEPTION

• Betrayal and deception are breaches of trust. How to

justify them?
• Betrayal may be breaching privacy and cooperation.
• Are betrayal and deception undertaken for the sake of
the public good?
• Betrayal may occur if people are portrayed in negative
ways.
• Deception may happen in telling lies, not telling the
whole story, concealing the true purposes of the
research from participants.
 BETRAYAL AND DECEPTION
• Handling deception:
– Research in the interests of the public good;
– Exclude particularly vulnerable participants;
– Keep necessary deception to a minimum;
– Be sensitive to danger signals;
– Provide feedback/debriefing at the end of the
research;
– Find new, alternative ways of conducting the research
without deception.
 ACCESS AND ACCEPTANCE
• Access requires formal and informal permission and clearance
from relevant parties.
• Achieving goodwill and cooperation.
• Sensitive entry to the research location.
• Be prepared for negotiation of what can/cannot be done.
• Seek informed consent.
• Give all participants the chance to remain anonymous.
• Ensure that all data are given in strict confidentiality.
• Seek respondent validation.
• Be prepared to give participants a copy of the final report.
• Permission for publication may need to be gained from the
participants.
• Where possible, the research report should be of benefit to the
school and participants.
ETHICS AND EVALUATIVE RESEARCH
 ETHICS AND EVALUATIVE RESEARCH
• Due process
• Privacy
• Equality
• Public perspicuity
• Humaneness
• Client benefit
• Academic freedom
• Respect for autonomy
 SPONSORED RESEARCH
It may be considered unethical for the sponsor to
tell the researcher:
• how to conduct the research;
• what results he/she should look for and what
findings should be suppressed;
• what should and should not be reported;
• to conceal who the sponsor is;
• what are the purposes of the research.
 SPONSORED RESEARCH

Sponsors do have the right:

• to remain confidential;
• to non-disclosure of who they are;
• to non-disclosure of the purposes and findings of
the research.

The researcher must retain the right to conduct

the study as she or he thinks fit, informed by, but
not decided by, the sponsor.
 Protect
Protect safety
Protect
confiden-
well-being
tiality

RESPONSIBILITY
Protect Protect
TO RESEARCH
anonymity reputations
COLLEAGUES

Keep to
Ethical
agreed Do not
procedures
behaviour
jeopardize future
research
 Researcher
competence
Integrity of
Rigour
research

Report RESPONSIBILITY Report

accurately TO RESEARCH clearly

Honesty Don’t Fairness

jeopardize future
research