1 / 10

The distinction between ethical principles and professional codes The guidelines, § 4

Implementation of research ethical guidelines Micheline Egge Grung The National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities, Oslo, Norway. The distinction between ethical principles and professional codes The guidelines, § 4

felicia
Download Presentation

The distinction between ethical principles and professional codes The guidelines, § 4

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Implementation of research ethical guidelinesMicheline Egge GrungThe National Committee for Research Ethics in the Social Sciences and the Humanities, Oslo, Norway

  2. The distinction between ethical principles and professional codes • The guidelines, § 4 • ‘The ethical obligations of research relate partly to norms in the research process and partly to responsibility for the consequences of research. The main types of norms are: • Norms relating to respect for human dignity • Ethical norms in relations between researchers • Norms relating to truth-seeking and reliability • The role of national committees for research ethics • Possible role of a proposed national board for for scientific misconduct and good scientific practice

  3. Research ethical guidelines adopted by NESH • National guidelines applying to the fields of social sciences, humanities and law • Adopted for the first time in 1993 • Contains 46 paragraphs altogether and a checklist (appendix) concerning commissioned research

  4. Types of (research) ethical principles • Absolute (deontological) principles § 15 Storage of information which can identify individuals. ‘Information on identifiable individuals must be properly stored. […] ’ • Principles that require the exercise of moral judgment § 8 The obligation to obtain consent. ‘Research projects which presuppose active participation must as a general rule only be initiated with the freely obtained and informed consent of the participants. […] ’

  5. Two common critiques • Guidelines are vague and feeble proclamations • Guidelines function as external ‘high courts’ not in touch with research realities • Research ethical guidelines presuppose: • Specific, non-trivial norms • Solid basis in explicitly or implicitly recognised research ethical principles in research community

  6. Main responsibility for implementation • § 30 The ethical responsibility of research institutions. ‘Research institutions must have procedures for enforcing guidelines for research ethics. […] ’

  7. Ethical committees / boards can operate through… • 1. Identification and development of existing norms through dialogue with scientific communities • …continually! • 2. Advising individual researchers NESH’s mandate: advisory function Main purpose: contribute to reflection • 3. Co-operation with other institutions: The Data Inspectorate = a kind of control system for research projects involving personal data

  8. 4. Seminars • Consent • Research ethical challenges of biographies • Research ethical challenges of minority research • 2003: Commercialization

  9. Main obstacles in implementing guidelines …10 years after the guidelines were adopted for the first time • Research ethics a part of the individual researcher’s daily life 5. Education in research ethics • Norms under pressure 6. Incorporate research ethical principles as part of contracts - responsibility for data collection and analysis - publication

  10. The proposed national board for scientific misconduct and good scientific practice • Key considerations: • All disciplines • Protection of whistleblowers • Preventive/educational measures • Wide definition of scientific misconduct • Composition of board • Executive work • Treat and settle complaints concerning scientific misconduct • Confidential • Consequences of the board’s decisions

More Related