1 / 12

Literature Review Ethics

Literature Review Ethics. … if it’s in the public domain, what’s the problem?. Traditional reviews. overview of literature in the field, relevant to research topic or questions stand-alone or backdrop to focused study may include all sorts – eg research

renee-roth
Download Presentation

Literature Review Ethics

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. Literature Review Ethics … if it’s in the public domain, what’s the problem?..

  2. Traditional reviews • overview of literature in the field, relevant to research topic or questions • stand-alone or backdrop to focused study • may include all sorts – eg research ‘evidence’, theory, accounts of experience, think pieces, policy etc • may include published and ‘grey’ literature • usually (in our case) to inform some applied purpose

  3. Systematic reviews • focused on tightly defined research question(s) • mainly empirical research • comprehensive coverage of relevant work • judge research quality and relevance; weight messages accordingly • conventionally to tell us ‘what works’

  4. Some ethical reflections on: • Purpose • Sources • Conduct • Use

  5. Utilitarian ethic Greatest good of the greatest number… The worth of an action rests in its overall utility….. Ends justify means. Jeremy Bentham John Stuart Mill

  6. Kantian ethic Act in each case as you would in all…. Treat others as ends not means….. Do as you would be done by. Immanuel Kant

  7. Review Purpose • To be not just interesting but useful • Useful in an aggregative way – greater than the sum of parts, for the greater good? But: • Who sets the review question agenda – whose greater good counts? • Is the product only as good as the process?

  8. Sources • Acknowledge and fully reference all • If not in the public domain, ensure permission is obtained from author(s)

  9. Review conduct – the Kantian case for systematic review? • Traditional reviews are more concerned with ends than means – how you arrive at your synthesis is academically open to scrutiny, but ethically up to you • Systematic reviews require that all empirical research is given the benefit of equally consistent scrutiny, to judge its worth. Good science is accountable and fair. The end is only as good as the means…

  10. Systematic review conduct – some conundrums • Privileging ‘science’, empirical research and ‘what works’ is an ethical stance – for the greater good of whom? • Ethical conduct demonstrated is a recognised standard for judging research quality – but tends to take low profile • Is it justifiable to highlight some (eg minority) research voices over others, for reasons of values not rigour? • What do we do with research that tells us what we don’t want to hear?

  11. Use (or misuse) of reviews How can we make systematic reviews accessible to all who need to know? How can we ensure that messages from the many are made relevant to the particular (what works for whom, in what context?) Reviews are commonly commissioned for a policy purpose…. How (far) can the reviewer ensure this is for the greater good?

  12. Portrait of an ethically sound literature reviewer

More Related