Research Ethics

Prepared by:
Florencia Carlino, Ph.D.
Professor and Sault College REB’s Chair
This presentation aims to:

• Discuss what research looked like

when there were no ethical
regulations.

• Provide essential information

regarding the ethically responsible
conduct of research in Canada.

• Explain the role of Sault College’s

REB.
Research was not always an ethical endeavor…

The history of research is full of examples of

experiments in which the participants’ ethical
rights were not fully respected.

This video compiles some of them:

Mindchop (Sep 15, 2016). 10 Psychological

Experiments You Would Never Believe Happened. [Video
file], https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qH2q59pSZc
Other examples
of unethical
research

During the Nazi regime, Josef Mengele (“Angel of Death”) conducted

medical experiments with Auschwitz prisoners in 1930s. He was
responsible for procedures and surgeries to change people’s eye
colour, blood transfusions, injection of germs, etc. He choose twin
children as the prime source for his experiments because this
allowed him to alter one twin and use the other as a control.
 The Blue Eyes & Brown
Eyes Experiment

In 1968, Jane Elliott (elementary teacher) conducted this

controversial experiment, following the assassination of Martin
Luther King, Jr.

Guided by anti-racist research goals, she wanted her students to

experiment, first-hand, how it feels to be discriminated against and
how this affects one’s behaviours, feelings, and self esteem.

The goal of her experiment was to educate her students to become

anti-racist citizens. However, she did not anticipate the psychological
consequences that her students might have felt, as a result of being
treated poorly by an authority figure such as a teacher.
 The Stanford Prison Experiment
In 1971, Dr. Philip Zimbardo, Psychology
professor with the University of Stanford
conducted an experiment that became
emblematic of the violation of ethical rights of
its participants.

Like Jane Elliot, Zimbardo’s experiment was

triggered by progressive research purposes.
He wanted to find out if non-violent people can
become violent under oppressive
circumstances. If the social environment in
which you live can change your psychological
behaviour.

There are few environments more oppressive

than a prison. With this premise in mind, he
simulated a prison in his research lab and hired
male college students to play the role of
prisoners and guards.
He and his research team observed the hired students acting
as prisoners and guards to see if they became violent as a
result of the oppressive environment… And they did…

But Zimbardo never thought about the psychological trauma

of this experiment in the participants. The experiment ought
to be suspended earlier than it was initially planned, as the
relationships bt. “guards” and “prisoners” got out of hand.
Kyle Patrick Alvarez,
K. P. (2015). Stanford
Prison Experiment.
Official Trailer of the
film based on the
actual experiment:
https://www.prison
exp.org/
 Deception or partial disclosure
This occurs when participants are not fully informed of
the real research purpose in advance, because if they
were, they might intentionally or unintentionally change
how they would otherwise behave and researchers
wouldn’t be able to observe participants’ natural
behaviour.

In some psychological, sociological, health, and

marketing experiments, the less the subject knows, the
better.

Example: Psychological research about risk taking and

Deception in Research-
Example

Gee, A. (Nov. 2, 2015). The

Real Blind Man Honesty Test
(Social Experiment). [Video
File].
https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=LjufgOcZLZs
 The Placebo Effect
Other examples of deception research are studies that involve a placebo, which allows
researchers to know if a treatment is effective or if the patient gets better as a result of
their own psychological suggestion.

In health research, a placebo is a fake drug. It looks and tastes like the real drug that
researchers want to try. It usually has the form of a pill (known as the “sugar pill”), but
it does not contain any real medicine.

Placebos could be used in clinical trials in controlled experiments to discover if a new

drug helps to improve a patient’s condition:
– The experimental group receives a pill with the real drug that is supposed to
cure the patient’s condition.

– The control group receives the placebo or sugar pill, while all other variables
(such as age, nutrition, etc.) remain under control.

– The researcher compares the results in both groups to find out if the
anticipated improvement was due to the drug intake or due to the fact that the
Bryce, E. (April 4, 2016).
The power of the placebo
effect. [Video File].
https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=z03FQGlGgo0
 Before 1990…
• Researchers, colleges, and universities didn’t
have the ethical concerns/discussions we have
today.

• Over time, scholars in most countries have

learned from the mistakes of the past and set
some ethical principles and standards to allow
deception in research to occur only under
certain conditions.
 The Debriefing in Deception Research
To comply with ethical standards, deception can be used in research, as long
as researchers do a debriefing with participants.
A debriefing is an instance, after gathering the data, in which:

 researchers inform participants that they have been observed;

 researchers provide an explanation as to why deception was absolutely

necessary to respond to the research question;

 researchers explain the real purpose of the research and why they could
not disclose it up front;

 Once participants are fully informed, researchers ask them consent to

use their data. Researchers can only use the data of participants who
 Research that involves humans (with or without deception) is a serious matter.

It must be treated responsibly

That is why, now, research involving humans (people)

is regulated in most countries.

There are standards that researchers need to comply

with in order to pursue it.
 What is the TCPS2?
Stands for the Tri-Council Policy Statement, second edition.

It is a set of ethical standards that researchers and research agencies operating

in Canada need to comply with to guarantee that every time that research
gathers data from
humans, it does in such a way that there is ethical protection of those humans.

Published in 1998 (the original Policy), which was updated in 2010 giving birth
to the second edition.

Even though it is like a “bible” that guide the decisions of the REBs, it is also a
living document that is updated periodically to ensure that its content remains
current and clearly communicated, based on the feedback of Canada’s research
community.

Latest version of this Policy dates to 2022 (available online):

https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/documents/tcps2-2022-en.pdf
 Research Ethics in Canada
Panel
3 Federal Research Agencies on Research
Ethics
CIHR NSERC (PRE)
Health Nat. Sciences & SSHRC
Engineering
Soc. Sciences &
Humanities Created in
2001
The above 3 Federal Agencies formed the PRE in 2001. Together with the Secretariat on
Responsible Conduct of Research, PRE has adopted the TCPS Policy as a benchmark for the
ethical conduct of research involving humans across Canada.
 What is the R.E.B.?
• This acronym stands for Research Ethics Board.

• It is a mandatory committee that exists in most Canadian Colleges and

Universities that commit themselves to comply with the federal policies
that regulate the ethically responsive conduct of research set up by the
TCPS2.

• At Sault College, our REB was created in 2011. It reports to the Applied
Research Office.

• It includes internal members with experience in research and volunteer

external members. All with diverse professional backgrounds.

• Sault College REB’s website: www.saultcollege.ca/reb

 Who are the participants of a study?

• One of the first decisions researchers need to make is where

they are gathering their data from.

• A research study can focus on:

– things or artifacts,
– ideas and cultural beliefs,
– laws,
– animals,
– plants,
– people.

• If your study is going to gather information from people (human

subjects), that people are considered the research participants.
 How do researchers seek the ethical advice of
REBs?
If you are planning to conduct research that involve
humans, you must approach your institution’s REB and
complete a form before initiating your project.

At Sault College, you can access that form by clicking on

https://www.saultcollege.ca/overview/research-ethics-bo
ard-forms
, and select :
Ontario Community College Multi-Site Application Form

You cannot start your research until you get a letter of 20

 The REB assesses research projects focusing on:
3 Core Principles Underlying Ethically Responsive Research on
Humans

Respect Concern
for for
persons Welfare

Justice
 Respect for Persons
• It respects the participants’ autonomy and their
ability to decide if they want to participate in the
study.

• For that reason, participants must sign an informed

consent of the participants, after reading a letter of
invitation that explains what the research consists.

22
 The informed consent must explain:
• The research goals.
• The professional qualifications and affiliation of
researchers.
• What participants are expected to do.
• Participants’ benefits and risks.
• The volunteer character of participation and the
participants’ right to withdraw at any time without
consequences.
• Who to contact if participants have any questions.
• How participants can access the research results.
• The fact that the study has ethical approval by the
corresponding REB (research ethic board).
 Sample of a letter of invitation and
informed consent
This is a clear example of both the letter and the
consent.

You may want to use it as a model and make the

necessary adaptations when you design your own
research study.

https://onlineservices.concordia.ab.ca/documents/
common/reb/generic_letter_consent_form.pdf
 Respect for Persons (cont’d)
Researchers need to provide measures to guarantee:

• The voluntary nature of the participation: make sure that participants participate
only if they wish to do so.

• Participants’ awareness of their potential risks & benefits of being involved in the
study.

• The security, privacy, and confidentiality of the gathered information: researchers

need to find a secure and inviolable storage method for the research data (ex.
encryption, password use). Participants’ data need be destroyed after certain time
(usually 5-year period).

• Participants’ anonymity: participants names and identifiable information (such as

name, age, race, cultural background, gender, etc.) need to be camouflaged so that
nobody can recognize who they are.

• When the participation in the research may cause certain risks to participants,
access to supportive resources will have to be provided (e.g., counselling in the case25
 Concern for Welfare
• The premise is that participants’ welfare is more
important than the goals of the researchers.

• Researchers (and REBs) need to always assess the real

and potential risks (either social, academic, financial,
political, psychological) that the study can have for
participants.

• The benefits of the research need to outweigh the risks.

Risks Benefits 26
 Concern for Welfare (Cont’d)
All research endeavors entail potential and real risks and
benefits for the participant population.

The benefits include anything that, as a result of the

research study, positively affect the welfare of the society,
the community or the academic discipline through the
advancement of knowledge for future generations. The
benefits can directly affect the participants by shedding
light about an issue of their concern or improving their life
quality.

Risks Benefits 27
 Concern for Welfare (Cont’d)
The risks is anything that has a negative effect on the
participants’ welfare. The nature of the harm can be social,
behavioural, psychological, physical, academic, or economic.

The risk could be minimal or substantial.

Minimal risk occurs when the probability and magnitude of

possible harm is no greater than those encountered by
participants in their everyday life.

Researchers and REBs need to do a risk assessment. A proper

ethical analysis need to include the foreseeable risk analysis and
the available methods to mitigate or compensate the risks.
28
 Justice

• Researchers need to treat participants fairly and equitably:

– Fairness: treating all people w/ equal respect and concern.
– Equity: distributing the benefits and burdens of the research participation in a way
that nobody is unduly burdened.
– Treating people fairly and equitable does not always mean to treat everybody in
the same way. Vulnerable populations (such as children, marginalized groups,
elderly, prisoners, people w/mental or physical health issues) require differential
treatment and special attention (ex. supportive resources).

• Participant selection:
– Equitable distribution of research risks and benefits among participants.
– Equitable selection of participants within the population

• Researchers need to be aware of the imbalance of power between

researcher and participants:
• Participants may not understand the research with the same level of depth as
researchers Therefore, researcher need to communicate research goals, risks,29and
results in a way that participants could understand.
 References
• ACCC (2014). College and institutes of applied research 2012-2013: Innovation
for small businesses and communities, cited by Holmes, K. (2016), p. 23-24

• ACCC (2013). The college and institute applied research advantage: Innovation
for small businesses and communities, cited by Holmes, K. (2016), p. 23.

• Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering

Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research
Council of Canada, Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research
Involving Humans, December 2022.
https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/documents/tcps2-2022-en.pdf

• CAREB: Canadian Association of Research Ethics. https://careb-accer.org/

• Holmes, K. (2016). Research Ethics in the Ontario College Sector: An exploratory

descriptive study of governance and administrative frameworks. Ph.D. thesis.
Toronto: OISE.
THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION!!