Research Ethics and Standards

Research ethics and standards, codes of conduct, and institutional review boards (IRBs) make it easy for student and faculty researchers to understand both how to protect those involved in their research and the legal implications of their research – Right?

Wrong!

SAJ found that the information and protections given to scholars regarding the latter is extremely unclear and even contradictory across universities and even within disciplines.

What is clear is that, as researchers we are responsible for the safety and confidentiality of our participants.

From the American Sociological Association code of ethics:

Confidential information provided by research participants, students, employees, clients, or others is treated as such by sociologists even if there is no legal protection or privilege to do so. Sociologists have an obligation to protect confidential information and not allow information gained in confidence from being used in ways that would unfairly compromise research participants, students, employees, clients, or others.

IRBs also provide regulations regarding the confidentiality of research participants:

Confidentiality

The researcher should describe the level of confidentiality of the research data and the measures that will be taken to ensure that confidentiality is maintained.

The phrase “only aggregate data will be presented” is appropriate only when it is true. Strictly understood, it means that the researcher will not describe a patient individually, even if the patient has a unique event. What is more common, however, and what the subject should be told, is that the subject’s identity will not be disclosed.

As scholars, we need to do our best to protect the confidentiality of our participants, yet these required promises are not protected legally by IRBs or our particular codes of ethics.

It is important to understand that, although the IRB requires you to keep the confidence of your participants, it does not protect you in those efforts. This is an issue clearly explored by Rik Scarce in his 2005 Chronicle of Higher Education article.

Additionally, Inside Higher Ed explores some of these conflicts in an article on Scott Demuth called “Protecting His Sources“.

Importantly, Institutional Review Boards are still evolving, especially in the Social Sciences, and we have the power to help shape the future of research protection.  Get involved in Scholars for Academic Justice by contacting us at saj@gmail.com