ethics in research lesson plan

Ethics Lesson Plan: Determining What is Right and Solving Conflicts

In this ethics lesson plan, which is adaptable for grades 3-12, students will use BrainPOP resources to explore the basics of ethics and morality. They will reflect on how we determine what is right and wrong, and practice using two different strategies for making tough ethical decisions. Students will also practice conflict resolution skills and reaching compromises with others who hold different ethical beliefs.

Lesson Plan Common Core State Standards Alignments

Students will:.

• Define ethics and explain how we decide what is right and wrong.
• Explore two different strategies for solving tough ethical dilemmas and evaluate each based on their effectiveness.
• Internet access for BrainPOP
• Class set of photocopies of the Graphic Organizer

Vocabulary:

Lesson procedure:.

• Display one of the ethics quotes from the Related Reading Quotables page or a quote of your own choosing. Alternatively, have students explore as essential question such as "How do we determine what is right and wrong?" As a warm-up activity, have students reflect in writing or orally on what the quote or essential question means to them.
• Talk with students about their responses. What are ethics? (The movie defines ethics as a set of guidelines for behaving morally.) Who determines the set of guidelines? Where do the guidelines originate? How do the guidelines change over time?
• Play the Ethics movie for the class. Allow students to talk about how their understanding of ethics evolved after viewing the movie.
• Ask a student volunteer to explain Tim's process for working through ethical dilemmas (making a pros-and-cons-style list.) Have students ever tried this method? How did it work?
• Project the Worksheet on your interactive whiteboard for students to see. Explain that they will choose one of the ethical dilemmas on the Related Reading In Depth page and pair up with a friend to choose sides in the dilemma. Each person will use a sheet of paper to write down arguments to support their side.
• Provide time for students to share their arguments with their partner. Remind students of Tim's suggestion to ask themselves, "What solution is fairest to all the people involved?" Encourage students to reach a compromise together and record it at the bottom of their papers.
• Ask for volunteers to share the compromise that they agreed to, and talk with students about how the decisions were made.
• Pose the following questions to students: How do you determine what is right and wrong? What is the foundation of your "moral compass"? Pass out photocopies of the Graphic Organizer and have students complete it based on an ethical dilemma from the BrainPOP movie, Related Reading page, or their own lives. This could be completed as a homework assignment if you want to give students additional time to reflect...
• Ask students to think about which decision-making tool was more helpful for them personally, the activity (pros/cons style list) or the graphic organizer. What strategies will students use to make tough ethical decisions in the future?

Extension Activities:

• BrainPOP Jr. (K-3)
• BrainPOP ELL
• BrainPOP Science
• BrainPOP Español
• BrainPOP Français
• Set Up Accounts
• Single Sign-on
• Manage Subscription
• Quick Tours
• About BrainPOP

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Trademarks & Copyrights

Welcome to the Resources for Research Ethics Education website!

• Terms of Use
• Site Feedback

• Find My Rep

You are here

100 Activities for Teaching Research Ethics and Integrity

• Catherine Dawson - Self-employed researcher and writer
• Description

Supplements

Preview this book, for instructors, select a purchasing option, order from:.

• VitalSource
• Amazon Kindle
• Google Play

Related Products

• Share on Facebook
• Tweet This Resource
• Pin This Resource

Research Ethics

This research ethics lesson plan also includes:.

• Join to access all included materials

Young scientists discuss the results of carelessness during experimentation and the temptation to misrepresent findings. These activities are intended to develop the ability to identify scientific error, misconduct, and fraud. Use this resource at the beginning of a biology course to introduce learners to ethical considerations and to review laboratory techniques at the same time!

Start Your Free Trial

Save time and discover engaging curriculum for your classroom. Reviewed and rated by trusted, credentialed teachers.

• Collection Types
• Activities & Projects
• Assessments
• Graphics & Images
• Handouts & References
• Interactives
• Lab Resources
• Learning Games
• Lesson Plans
• Presentations
• Primary Sources
• Printables & Templates
• Professional Documents
• Study Guides
• Instructional Videos
• Performance Tasks
• Graphic Organizers
• Writing Prompts
• Constructed Response Items
• AP Test Preps
• Lesson Planet Articles
• Online Courses
• Interactive Whiteboards
• Home Letters
• Unknown Types
• Stock Footages
• All Resource Types

See similar resources:

Scientific data: it's not as pretty as it looks, apply scientific inquiry and scientific habits of mind, revising an investigation, it’s the heart of the matter, the scientific method, science friday: research misconduct, in search of a land ethic, help wanted physicist, show me the genes.

• Request new password
• Create a new account

100 Activities for Teaching Research Ethics and Integrity

Here you will find PDFs of all the student handouts in the book.

Log in to access the instructor resources using the top menu and download the student activity handouts.

These practical, user-friendly original activities have been designed to inspire and support educators of research ethics and integrity at undergraduate and postgraduate level. Focussing on eight key areas, activities cover:

• Respecting human dignity, privacy and rights
• Obtaining informed consent in the digital world
• Capturing data on sexual orientation and gender identity
• Recognizing and addressing bias when collecting data
• Creating social change through research practice
• Assessing the ethical implications of data sharing

To find out more about the book, please visit the SAGE website .

For instructors

Access resources that are only available to Faculty and Administrative Staff.

Want to explore the book further?

Order Review Copy

Disclaimer:

This website may contain links to both internal and external websites. All links included were active at the time the website was launched. SAGE does not operate these external websites and does not necessarily endorse the views expressed within them. SAGE cannot take responsibility for the changing content or nature of linked sites, as these sites are outside of our control and subject to change without our knowledge. If you do find an inactive link to an external website, please try to locate that website by using a search engine. SAGE will endeavour to update inactive or broken links when possible.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• Ethical Considerations in Research | Types & Examples

Ethical Considerations in Research | Types & Examples

Published on October 18, 2021 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on May 9, 2024.

Ethical considerations in research are a set of principles that guide your research designs and practices. Scientists and researchers must always adhere to a certain code of conduct when collecting data from people.

The goals of human research often include understanding real-life phenomena, studying effective treatments, investigating behaviors, and improving lives in other ways. What you decide to research and how you conduct that research involve key ethical considerations.

These considerations work to

• protect the rights of research participants
• enhance research validity
• maintain scientific or academic integrity

Table of contents

Why do research ethics matter, getting ethical approval for your study, types of ethical issues, voluntary participation, informed consent, confidentiality, potential for harm, results communication, examples of ethical failures, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research ethics.

Research ethics matter for scientific integrity, human rights and dignity, and collaboration between science and society. These principles make sure that participation in studies is voluntary, informed, and safe for research subjects.

You’ll balance pursuing important research objectives with using ethical research methods and procedures. It’s always necessary to prevent permanent or excessive harm to participants, whether inadvertent or not.

Defying research ethics will also lower the credibility of your research because it’s hard for others to trust your data if your methods are morally questionable.

Even if a research idea is valuable to society, it doesn’t justify violating the human rights or dignity of your study participants.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Before you start any study involving data collection with people, you’ll submit your research proposal to an institutional review board (IRB) .

An IRB is a committee that checks whether your research aims and research design are ethically acceptable and follow your institution’s code of conduct. They check that your research materials and procedures are up to code.

If successful, you’ll receive IRB approval, and you can begin collecting data according to the approved procedures. If you want to make any changes to your procedures or materials, you’ll need to submit a modification application to the IRB for approval.

If unsuccessful, you may be asked to re-submit with modifications or your research proposal may receive a rejection. To get IRB approval, it’s important to explicitly note how you’ll tackle each of the ethical issues that may arise in your study.

There are several ethical issues you should always pay attention to in your research design, and these issues can overlap with each other.

You’ll usually outline ways you’ll deal with each issue in your research proposal if you plan to collect data from participants.

Voluntary participation means that all research subjects are free to choose to participate without any pressure or coercion.

All participants are able to withdraw from, or leave, the study at any point without feeling an obligation to continue. Your participants don’t need to provide a reason for leaving the study.

It’s important to make it clear to participants that there are no negative consequences or repercussions to their refusal to participate. After all, they’re taking the time to help you in the research process , so you should respect their decisions without trying to change their minds.

Voluntary participation is an ethical principle protected by international law and many scientific codes of conduct.

Take special care to ensure there’s no pressure on participants when you’re working with vulnerable groups of people who may find it hard to stop the study even when they want to.

Informed consent refers to a situation in which all potential participants receive and understand all the information they need to decide whether they want to participate. This includes information about the study’s benefits, risks, funding, and institutional approval.

You make sure to provide all potential participants with all the relevant information about

• what the study is about
• the risks and benefits of taking part
• how long the study will take
• your supervisor’s contact information and the institution’s approval number

Usually, you’ll provide participants with a text for them to read and ask them if they have any questions. If they agree to participate, they can sign or initial the consent form. Note that this may not be sufficient for informed consent when you work with particularly vulnerable groups of people.

If you’re collecting data from people with low literacy, make sure to verbally explain the consent form to them before they agree to participate.

For participants with very limited English proficiency, you should always translate the study materials or work with an interpreter so they have all the information in their first language.

In research with children, you’ll often need informed permission for their participation from their parents or guardians. Although children cannot give informed consent, it’s best to also ask for their assent (agreement) to participate, depending on their age and maturity level.

Anonymity means that you don’t know who the participants are and you can’t link any individual participant to their data.

You can only guarantee anonymity by not collecting any personally identifying information—for example, names, phone numbers, email addresses, IP addresses, physical characteristics, photos, and videos.

In many cases, it may be impossible to truly anonymize data collection . For example, data collected in person or by phone cannot be considered fully anonymous because some personal identifiers (demographic information or phone numbers) are impossible to hide.

You’ll also need to collect some identifying information if you give your participants the option to withdraw their data at a later stage.

Data pseudonymization is an alternative method where you replace identifying information about participants with pseudonymous, or fake, identifiers. The data can still be linked to participants but it’s harder to do so because you separate personal information from the study data.

Confidentiality means that you know who the participants are, but you remove all identifying information from your report.

All participants have a right to privacy, so you should protect their personal data for as long as you store or use it. Even when you can’t collect data anonymously, you should secure confidentiality whenever you can.

Some research designs aren’t conducive to confidentiality, but it’s important to make all attempts and inform participants of the risks involved.

As a researcher, you have to consider all possible sources of harm to participants. Harm can come in many different forms.

• Psychological harm: Sensitive questions or tasks may trigger negative emotions such as shame or anxiety.
• Social harm: Participation can involve social risks, public embarrassment, or stigma.
• Physical harm: Pain or injury can result from the study procedures.
• Legal harm: Reporting sensitive data could lead to legal risks or a breach of privacy.

It’s best to consider every possible source of harm in your study as well as concrete ways to mitigate them. Involve your supervisor to discuss steps for harm reduction.

Make sure to disclose all possible risks of harm to participants before the study to get informed consent. If there is a risk of harm, prepare to provide participants with resources or counseling or medical services if needed.

Some of these questions may bring up negative emotions, so you inform participants about the sensitive nature of the survey and assure them that their responses will be confidential.

The way you communicate your research results can sometimes involve ethical issues. Good science communication is honest, reliable, and credible. It’s best to make your results as transparent as possible.

Take steps to actively avoid plagiarism and research misconduct wherever possible.

Plagiarism means submitting others’ works as your own. Although it can be unintentional, copying someone else’s work without proper credit amounts to stealing. It’s an ethical problem in research communication because you may benefit by harming other researchers.

Self-plagiarism is when you republish or re-submit parts of your own papers or reports without properly citing your original work.

This is problematic because you may benefit from presenting your ideas as new and original even though they’ve already been published elsewhere in the past. You may also be infringing on your previous publisher’s copyright, violating an ethical code, or wasting time and resources by doing so.

In extreme cases of self-plagiarism, entire datasets or papers are sometimes duplicated. These are major ethical violations because they can skew research findings if taken as original data.

You notice that two published studies have similar characteristics even though they are from different years. Their sample sizes, locations, treatments, and results are highly similar, and the studies share one author in common.

Research misconduct

Research misconduct means making up or falsifying data, manipulating data analyses, or misrepresenting results in research reports. It’s a form of academic fraud.

These actions are committed intentionally and can have serious consequences; research misconduct is not a simple mistake or a point of disagreement about data analyses.

Research misconduct is a serious ethical issue because it can undermine academic integrity and institutional credibility. It leads to a waste of funding and resources that could have been used for alternative research.

Later investigations revealed that they fabricated and manipulated their data to show a nonexistent link between vaccines and autism. Wakefield also neglected to disclose important conflicts of interest, and his medical license was taken away.

This fraudulent work sparked vaccine hesitancy among parents and caregivers. The rate of MMR vaccinations in children fell sharply, and measles outbreaks became more common due to a lack of herd immunity.

Research scandals with ethical failures are littered throughout history, but some took place not that long ago.

Some scientists in positions of power have historically mistreated or even abused research participants to investigate research problems at any cost. These participants were prisoners, under their care, or otherwise trusted them to treat them with dignity.

To demonstrate the importance of research ethics, we’ll briefly review two research studies that violated human rights in modern history.

These experiments were inhumane and resulted in trauma, permanent disabilities, or death in many cases.

After some Nazi doctors were put on trial for their crimes, the Nuremberg Code of research ethics for human experimentation was developed in 1947 to establish a new standard for human experimentation in medical research.

In reality, the actual goal was to study the effects of the disease when left untreated, and the researchers never informed participants about their diagnoses or the research aims.

Although participants experienced severe health problems, including blindness and other complications, the researchers only pretended to provide medical care.

When treatment became possible in 1943, 11 years after the study began, none of the participants were offered it, despite their health conditions and high risk of death.

Ethical failures like these resulted in severe harm to participants, wasted resources, and lower trust in science and scientists. This is why all research institutions have strict ethical guidelines for performing research.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Normal distribution
• Measures of central tendency
• Chi square tests
• Confidence interval
• Quartiles & Quantiles
• Cluster sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Thematic analysis
• Cohort study
• Peer review
• Ethnography

Research bias

• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Conformity bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Availability heuristic
• Attrition bias
• Social desirability bias

Ethical considerations in research are a set of principles that guide your research designs and practices. These principles include voluntary participation, informed consent, anonymity, confidentiality, potential for harm, and results communication.

Scientists and researchers must always adhere to a certain code of conduct when collecting data from others .

These considerations protect the rights of research participants, enhance research validity , and maintain scientific integrity.

Research ethics matter for scientific integrity, human rights and dignity, and collaboration between science and society. These principles make sure that participation in studies is voluntary, informed, and safe.

Anonymity means you don’t know who the participants are, while confidentiality means you know who they are but remove identifying information from your research report. Both are important ethical considerations .

You can only guarantee anonymity by not collecting any personally identifying information—for example, names, phone numbers, email addresses, IP addresses, physical characteristics, photos, or videos.

You can keep data confidential by using aggregate information in your research report, so that you only refer to groups of participants rather than individuals.

These actions are committed intentionally and can have serious consequences; research misconduct is not a simple mistake or a point of disagreement but a serious ethical failure.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Bhandari, P. (2024, May 09). Ethical Considerations in Research | Types & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 22, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/research-ethics/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Other students also liked, data collection | definition, methods & examples, what is self-plagiarism | definition & how to avoid it, how to avoid plagiarism | tips on citing sources, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

• International
• Education Jobs
• Schools directory
• Resources Education Jobs Schools directory News Search

Ethics in psychological research lesson: research methods

Subject: Psychology

Age range: 16+

Resource type: Lesson (complete)

Last updated

14 September 2021

• Share through email
• Share through twitter
• Share through linkedin
• Share through facebook
• Share through pinterest

A comprehensive pack of resources to successfully teach ‘ethical issues’ as part of research methods.

I teach ethical issues first to my new year 12 students - as such this resource is designed to both teach content but also act as an icebreaker and opportunity to discuss a range of research (to help students understand what psychology is all about).

If you do not start with research methods - the resources and lesson plan can be adapted easily and delivered in a shorter time period.

I’ve developed this resource over a few years and it is always a hit with students and I find it to be a really effective way to start the course.

**The following is included in this resource: **

Lesson plan - outline of how and when I use the activities

PowerPoint 1 - for the first lesson - including a starter question to initiate some discussion.

Ethic card task and student handout: I use this as an icebreaker but can also be used later on in the course to build in discussion and an understanding of ethics. Activity includes 12 studies - students only have 1 study each - the walk around the room and have to find all 12 studies (by talking to each other) and complete a worksheet alongside where they have to make 2 decisions: is this study ‘ethical/unethical’ and is this study ‘real/fake’ (they are actually all real studies and it leads to some great discussion about the range of research across psychology.

Paired work task - ethics cards - focused questions that students have to research and answer and present back to the class.

Link to my Kahoot quiz with questions based on the lesson materials

PowerPoint 2: overview of the ethical issues

Notes on what ethical issues are and the role of the British Psychological Society’s code of ethics.

Cut and stick activity - creates all the notes needed on each ethical issue, including how ‘to deal with them’. Answers included!

Group work activity - discussion scenarios (link to exam style questions - without them realising until after). Feedback provided on the PowerPoint.

Tes paid licence How can I reuse this?

Your rating is required to reflect your happiness.

It's good to leave some feedback.

Something went wrong, please try again later.

This resource hasn't been reviewed yet

To ensure quality for our reviews, only customers who have purchased this resource can review it

Report this resource to let us know if it violates our terms and conditions. Our customer service team will review your report and will be in touch.

Not quite what you were looking for? Search by keyword to find the right resource:

• The Open University
• Accessibility hub
• Guest user / Sign out
• Study with The Open University

My OpenLearn Profile

Personalise your OpenLearn profile, save your favourite content and get recognition for your learning

About this free course

Become an ou student, download this course, share this free course.

Start this free course now. Just create an account and sign in. Enrol and complete the course for a free statement of participation or digital badge if available.

Activity 1: Ethics in psychological research

This activity introduces you to the idea of ethics in psychological research. When conducting research, psychologists cannot do what they like – they must abide by a code of conduct. Above all, the aim of this is to protect the welfare of the people participating in the research. It is important that you grasp the main ethics principles and their importance, as you will be returning to them throughout this course. At the end of this activity, you will find a handout summarising the main teaching points. You should download this and add it to your files.

Learning about ethics in research

This is an in-depth lesson in research ethics for children and young people aged 11 and upwards.  The resources include videos, readings and practical exercises relating to a mock trial in asthma.

The materials were prepared by Kent, Surrey and Sussex Young Persons’ Advisory Group (YPAG) in collaboration with the Nuffield Council on Bioethics (part of the GenerationR Alliance ).

• Format Lessons, Texts, Videos
• Language/s English
• Target Audience Schools
• EBM Stage 0 - Why EBM?
• Duration >15 mins
• Difficulty Introductory
• = 1, orange: orangeStars() }, event: { mouseover: isLoggedIn() ? mouseoverStars.bind($data, 1) : null, mouseout: isLoggedIn() ? mouseoutStars.bind($data, 1): null }' >
• = 2, orange: orangeStars() }, event: { mouseover: isLoggedIn() ? mouseoverStars.bind($data, 2) : null, mouseout: isLoggedIn() ? mouseoutStars.bind($data, 2): null }' >
• = 3, orange: orangeStars() }, event: { mouseover: isLoggedIn() ? mouseoverStars.bind($data, 3) : null, mouseout: isLoggedIn() ? mouseoutStars.bind($data, 3): null }' >
• = 4, orange: orangeStars() }, event: { mouseover: isLoggedIn() ? mouseoverStars.bind($data, 4) : null, mouseout: isLoggedIn() ? mouseoutStars.bind($data, 4): null }' >
• = 5, orange: orangeStars() }, event: { mouseover: isLoggedIn() ? mouseoverStars.bind($data, 5) : null, mouseout: isLoggedIn() ? mouseoutStars.bind($data, 5): null }' >

By focussing on a fictional childhood asthma study, students are encouraged to consider and discuss ethical issues that may be experienced by researchers, those who review health research studies, and those who are considering participating in health research.

List of resources

• This Lesson Plan (PDF, also below in HTML)
• Film:  Processes, Papers and Professors:  how clinical research in young people gets approved (YouTube)
• Children in Research:  what it’s all about (Introduction, PDF)
• Questions about the research ethics of trials (Word)
• Young People’s Perspectives on Ethics Review (Report, PDF)
• Slide presentation (PowerPoint)
• Assent form for children and young people
• Consent form for parents and guardians
• Information sheet for children and young people
• Information sheet for parents and guardians
• Covering letter for parents and guardians
• Application for ethics review .

Research ethics and how health research is reviewed

This is a proposed two-part lesson/workshop designed to give an introduction to research ethics, and how proposals to carry out health research are assessed and approved by research ethics committees.

By focussing on a fictional childhood asthma study, students are encouraged to consider and discuss ethical issues that may be experienced by researchers, those who review health research studies, and those who are considering participating in health research, for example children and young people and their parents.

We suggest a structure with different activity options (films, role play exercise, discussion, further material) allowing the discussion to go into more or less detail depending on ability and prior knowledge – but you can pick and choose what you think is most suitable for your lesson and in what order.

The activities below are suitable for students from Key Stage 3 through to undergraduate level or above. They may be particularly relevant to A-level Psychology and other courses which include modules on research or research ethics.

Part 1: The ethics of research involving children

Presentation: research ethics and how health research is reviewed.

A short presentation about research ethics and clinical (health) research which covers:

• What is clinical research?
• Who does clinical research?
• What are ethics?
• What is ethical research?

Reading: information on a proposed research study

These two optional documents provide background information about the proposed research (they can also be given to students to read in preparation for the lesson).

• Option 1 (basic introduction): Students read the factsheet ‘ What’s it all about ?’. This summarises a proposed fictional clinical trial involving children affected by asthma.
• Option 2 (detailed introduction): Students read the research protocol ‘ Improving asthma treatments for children and young people ’. This is a complete fictional research protocol written to show what an application for ethics approval might look like.

Film: further contextual information on the proposed research study

Students watch the first part of the film Processes, Papers and Professors: how clinical research in young people gets approved (from beginning until 04:30).

The film introduces Ruby, her parents and her doctor – they talk about her condition (asthma), the medication she takes to control her asthma, and briefly about the research study outlined in the documents above which Ruby would be a candidate for (students could also watch this part of the video as preparation ahead of the lesson).

Discussion: students discuss the proposed research study

The discussion could be held as option A or B, and question prompts might include:

• Can students (themselves or acting as a research ethics committee member if using role play) identify any ethical issues arising from this proposal?
• Would they be happy for children to be recruited to take part in this study?
• Are there any changes that the researchers should make to improve their proposal?

The document ‘ What about the research ethics ?’ sets out some further prompts and questions about ethical issues raised by the proposed research, which may be helpful to enhance students’ discussions.

• Option A (role play): Students consider the research proposal as if they were a research ethics committee. In groups of six, each student is given a Committee Member role card and asked to discuss the research study proposed in the factsheet and decide whether to a) approve the research as proposed; b) suggest the researchers make some changes and resubmit the proposal; or c) refuse to approve the proposal.
• Option B (open discussion): Students discuss the research proposal in plenary or in groups and are then asked to vote by show of hands on whether to a) approve the research as proposed; b) suggest the researchers make some changes and resubmit the proposal; or c) refuse to approve the proposal.

Part 2: How research gets approved

Film: a research ethics committee at work.

Students watch the second part of the film Processes, Papers and Professors: how clinical research in young people gets approved (from 04:30 until end – about 12 mins).

This film shows a mock research ethics committee discussing the research proposal and whether to approve it.

Reflection (in plenary or groups)

Students are invited to reflect on what they heard in the film clip showing a research ethics committee discussing the proposal. Questions to discuss might include:

• Did the REC in the film reach new or different conclusions from the students?
• Did they miss any ethical issues that the students thought important?
• Calling participants ‘subjects’
• Incentives – rewarding the children who participate
• The researchers’ approach to risk (e.g. their approach to the ‘washout’ period)

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You may also like

• >15 mins
• Introductory

eYPAGnet Training Resources

Learning resources that will be helpful for training young people how to be active participants in research. Created for the European YPAG (Young Persons Advisory Groups) Network, www.eypagnet.eu/

Privacy Overview

• Our Areas of Emphasis
• Our Key Programs
• Our Board Emeritus
• Our Founders
• Our State Affiliates
• Our Event Calendar
• Newsletters
• Our Members
• Value Proposition
• #ThanksResearch
• Annual Awards: Buster & Nancy D. Alvord, and Alvin J. Thompson
• Member Job Postings
• Sponsorship Opportunities
• 2024 IRB CONFERENCE - July 25, 2024
• 2024 IBC, Biomedical Data and IP Security, and IACUC Conferences
• 2023 #ThanksResearch Gala
• 2023 October 19th Communication Workshop
• Camp BIOmed
• Topical Webinars
• Community Events
• Conference and Event Policies
• 2024 Portland Clinical Research Professionals Conference
• 2024 IBC, Biomedical Data & IP Security, and IACUC Conferences
• 2023 Hybrid Communication Workshop
• Ethics Primer
• Bioethics 101
• Introductory Bioinformatics: Genetic Testing
• Advanced Bioinformatics: Genetic Research
• The Nature of Scientific Research
• Animals in Research

Humans in Research

• Stem Cell Research
• HIV Vaccines
• Consumer Awareness
• For the Greater Good
• Education Strategies
• General Resources
• Student Resources
• Research Resources
• Useful Links

The Science and Ethics of Humans in Research 

Why do scientists involve humans in biomedical research? Who participates in research and why? Furthermore, how does the complex--and sometimes difficult--history of research with humans influence current attitudes, policies and practices?

This curriculum introduces students to how research with humans is conducted, the rules and regulations involved, and the bioethical principles that guide scientists when involving humans in research. Lesson strategies and bioethical discussions engage students in science content, as well as promote an understanding of the role of science in society.

Download The Science and Ethics of Humans in Research curriculum .

Individual lessons and support materials can be found on the Lessons page.

In order for us to measure how our curriculum resources are being used, please take a moment to  contact us .  

We also welcome feedback about our Humans in Research curriculum. We will not share your contact information with anyone.

Download  The Science and Ethics of Humans in Research  curriculum.  

This activity is designed to be used with the film RARE, a documentary which explores the major issues affecting people living with a rare genetic disorder- Hermansky-Pudlak Syndrome (HPS). Before the film, students explore and share their ideas about general themes that will be eventually displayed in the film by responding to statements in a Silent Chalk Talk. Students are then asked to view the film from the perspective of a stakeholder in regard to clinical trial testing a new drug for HPS. Stakeholders include Donna Appell, a mother working to find a cure for her twenty-one year old daughter who has HPS; Heather Kirkwood, a woman with HPS who is involved in a clinical trial for a drug to treat people with HPS; and Dr. William Gahl, a researcher from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) who works with people with HPS and runs the clinical trial in which Heather is enrolled. After watching the film, students gather for another Silent Chalk Talk and meet in small groups to discuss the film's ethical issues from different perspectives.

Download the PowerPoint slide set that accompanies this lesson.

This document provides an overview of the five lessons in the curriculum, the formative and summative assessments, and the master glossary in the appendix. It also gives credit to the authors and contributors, and maps the curriculum to the Framework for the Next Generation Science Standards, National Science Standards and Common Core State Standards.

Students begin the unit with an activity in which students sort their prior knowledge and any misconceptions about research involving human participants. In the Human Research Background Sort, students decide whether research statements are accurate or not by sorting them into two categories and explaining their thinking. This helps teachers elicit student ideas about research involving human participants and take students’ prior knowledge into account for the remainder of the unit. Students will revisit the statements to confirm or refute their positions throughout the unit.

In this lesson, students gain insight into the historical context related to the involvement of human participants in research. Students participate in an activity in which they analyze four historically notable case studies where ethics remain unclear. Students develop their own list of ethical guidelines by creating a concept map and then compare their list to the principles put forth in the Belmont Report: Respect for Persons (including autonomy), Beneficence, and Justice.  This lesson provides a preliminary understanding of the difficulties and considerations that need to be taken into account when involving humans in research.

Dowload the Historical Case Studies and Student Guiding Questions from this lesson.

This lesson guides students in applying the specific principles of the Belmont Report to complex case studies involving human participants as research subjects. Students analyze a case using the concept map they produced in Lesson One. They then work together in mixed-case groups to present their findings and evaluate each other's work using a peer evaluation process.

Students are introduced to the concept of an Institutional Review Board (IRB), also known as an Ethics Committee (EC), and perform a skit to learn about the regulations and membership requirements of an IRB. Students use information learned from the skit to further discuss the rationale for having IRBs review research studies involving humans. In small groups, students visit different stations to perform three activities typical of the work of IRBs. They work together to 1) simplify the language of a section of an informed consent document to be more easily understood, 2) analyze three advertisements made for fictional clinical trials to assess whether they are accurate and/or coercive, and 3) examine a segment of a research proposal written by an investigator describing the process for obtaining informed consent. Students report back to the class and discuss the benefits and limitations of the rigorous IRB process. Lastly, students read an article in which bioethicists encourage shorter, easier to understand consent forms.

Download a sample informed consent.

Download mock study advertisements from this lesson.

Students begin by gathering their own behavioral, medical, and genetic information, and prepare a mock cheek swab DNA sample.  Next, students consider using their information to participate in a number of simulated research projects.  This leads to a discussion about how the amount of time, degree of involvement, level of risk and reasons for participation can vary for different types of research studies. Finally, students think about the ramifications of the fast-growing technology of biobanking in the context of clinical research and discuss their personal views.

 In this lesson, students learn about the purpose and structure of clinical trials by simulating three phases of a trial using colored beads to represent a local population that could be involved in research.  Using colored beads to represent a local population that could be involved in research, students recruit participants for a study researching the effects of a medication on high blood pressure, a fairly common condition. After students complete the three clinical trial phases for this drug, they consider the challenges of running a clinical trial testing medication for a rare disease. Students will also be introduced to elements of study design for clinical trials such as the use of placebos, randomization, and blinded studies.

 Download the Drug Discovery and Development Overview PowerPoint Slide.

Students demonstrate what they have learned over the course of the unit by identifying and justifying their personal position regarding their own participation in a real clinical trial. Students evaluate a trial using a decision-making model to consider ethical protections, the scientific and social value of the trial, and the potential risks and benefits of their possible participation in the trial. Students then write a paper detailing how their actions reflect their position on research involving humans.

• Appendix and Master Glossary 7Appendix_HinR.pdf
• Cover Art Cover_Humans_in_Research_0.pdf
• Notebook Spine HinRSPINE.pdf

Lesson Three:  A sample informed consent form can be found  here.

Lesson Five:  Click here for the Drug Discovery & Development Overview PowerPoint slide  from Innovation.org.

Lesson Six : Interested in resources for the film  Rare ?

Click on the green text for the  accompanying PowerPoint  slide set.

Interested in curricular resources for the film  RARE ?

Click on the green text for the  RARE Film Guide .

The film may be ordered from  www.rarefilm.org

© NWABR.ORG 2024

Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. The Northwest Association for Biomedical Research, NWABR is a 501(c)3 organization.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Ann Med Surg (Lond)
• v.86(5); 2024 May
• PMC11060189

Ethics in scientific research: a lens into its importance, history, and future

Associated data.

Not applicable.

Introduction

Ethics are a guiding principle that shapes the conduct of researchers. It influences both the process of discovery and the implications and applications of scientific findings 1 . Ethical considerations in research include, but are not limited to, the management of data, the responsible use of resources, respect for human rights, the treatment of human and animal subjects, social responsibility, honesty, integrity, and the dissemination of research findings 1 . At its core, ethics in scientific research aims to ensure that the pursuit of knowledge does not come at the expense of societal or individual well-being. It fosters an environment where scientific inquiry can thrive responsibly 1 .

The need to understand and uphold ethics in scientific research is pertinent in today’s scientific community. First, the rapid advancement of technology and science raises ethical questions in fields like biotechnology, biomedical science, genetics, and artificial intelligence. These advancements raise questions about privacy, consent, and the potential long-term impacts on society and its environment 2 . Furthermore, the rise in public perception and scrutiny of scientific practices, fueled by a more informed and connected populace, demands greater transparency and ethical accountability from researchers and institutions.

This commentary seeks to bring to light the need and benefits associated with ethical adherence. The central theme of this paper highlights how upholding ethics in scientific research is a cornerstone for progress. It buttresses the fact that ethics in scientific research is vital for maintaining the trust of the public, ensuring the safety of participants, and legitimizing scientific findings.

Historical perspective

Ethics in research is significantly shaped by past experiences where a lack of ethical consideration led to negative consequences. One of the most striking examples of ethical misconduct is the Tuskegee Syphilis Study 3 conducted between 1932 and 1972 by the U.S. Public Health Service. In this study, African American men in Alabama were used as subjects to study the natural progression of untreated syphilis. They were not informed of their condition and were denied effective treatment, even after penicillin became available as a cure in the 1940s 3 .

From an ethical lens today, this is a gross violation of informed consent and an exploitation of a vulnerable population. The public outcry following the revelation of the study’s details led to the establishment of the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioural Research 4 . This commission eventually produced the Belmont Report in 1979 4 , setting forth principles such as respect for persons, beneficence, and justice, which now underpin ethical research practices 4 .

Another example that significantly impacted ethical regulations was the thalidomide tragedy of the late 1950s and early 1960s 5 . Thalidomide was marketed as a safe sedative for pregnant women to combat morning sickness in Europe. Thalidomide resulted in the birth of approximately ten thousand children with severe deformities due to its teratogenic effects 5 , which were not sufficiently researched prior to the drug’s release. This incident underscored the critical need for comprehensive clinical testing and highlighted the ethical imperative of understanding and communicating potential risks, particularly for vulnerable groups such as pregnant women. In response, drug testing regulations became more rigorous, and the importance of informed consent, especially in clinical trials, was emphasized.

The Stanford Prison Experiment of 1971, led by psychologist Philip Zimbardo is another prime example of ethical oversight leading to harmful consequences 6 . The experiment, which aimed to study the psychological effects of perceived power, resulted in emotional trauma for participants. Underestimating potential psychological harm with no adequate systems to safeguard human participants from harm was a breach of ethics in psychological studies 6 . This case highlighted the necessity for ethical guidelines that prioritize the mental and emotional welfare of participants, especially in psychological research. It led to stricter review processes and the establishment of guidelines to prevent psychological harm in research studies. It influenced the American Psychological Association and other bodies to refine their ethical guidelines, ensuring the protection of participants’ mental and emotional well-being.

Impact on current ethical standards

These historical, ethical oversights have been instrumental in shaping the current landscape of ethical standards in scientific research. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study led to the Belmont Report in 1979, which laid out key ethical principles such as respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. It also prompted the establishment of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to oversee research involving human subjects. The thalidomide tragedy catalyzed stricter drug testing regulations and informed consent requirements for clinical trials. The Stanford Prison Experiment influenced the American Psychological Association to refine its ethical guidelines, placing greater emphasis on the welfare and rights of participants.

These historical episodes of ethical oversights have been pivotal in forging the comprehensive ethical frameworks that govern scientific research today. They serve as stark reminders of the potential consequences of ethical neglect and the perpetual need to prioritize the welfare and rights of participants in any research endeavor.

One may ponder on the reason behind the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, where African American men with syphilis were deliberately left untreated. What led scientists to prioritize research outcomes over human well-being? At the time, racial prejudices, lack of understanding of ethical principles in human research, and regulatory oversight made such studies pass. Similarly, the administration of thalidomide to pregnant women initially intended as an antiemetic to alleviate morning sickness, resulted in unforeseen and catastrophic birth defects. This tragedy highlights a critical lapse in the pre-marketing evaluation of drugs’ safety.

Furthermore, the Stanford prison experiment, designed to study the psychological effects of perceived power, spiraled into an ethical nightmare as participants suffered emotional trauma. This begs the question on how these researchers initially justified their methods. From today’s lens of ethics, the studies conducted were a complete breach of misconduct, and I wonder if there were any standards that guided primitive research in science.

Current ethical standards and guidelines in research

Informed consent.

This mandates that participants are fully informed about the nature of the research, including its objectives, procedures, potential risks, and benefits 7 , 8 . They must be given the opportunity to ask questions and must voluntarily agree to participate without coercion 7 , 8 . This ensures respect for individual autonomy and decision-making.

Confidentiality and privacy

Confidentiality is pivotal in research involving human subjects. Participants’ personal information must be protected from unauthorized access or disclosure 7 , 8 . Researchers are obliged to take measures to preserve the anonymity and privacy of participants, which fosters trust and encourages participation in research 7 , 8 .

Non-maleficence and beneficence

These principles revolve around the obligation to avoid harm (non-maleficence) and to maximize possible benefits while minimizing potential harm (beneficence) 7 , 8 . Researchers must ensure that their studies do not pose undue risks to participants and that any potential risks are outweighed by the benefits.

Justice in research ethics refers to the fair selection and treatment of research participants 8 . It ensures that the benefits and burdens of research are distributed equitably among different groups in society, preventing the exploitation of vulnerable populations 8 .

The role of Institutional Review Boards (IRB)

Institutional Review Boards play critical roles in upholding ethical standards in research. An IRB is a committee established by an institution conducting research to review, approve, and monitor research involving human subjects 7 , 8 . Their primary role is to ensure that the rights and welfare of participants are protected.

Review and approval

Before a study commences, the IRB reviews the research proposal to ensure it adheres to ethical guidelines. This includes evaluating the risks and benefits, the process of obtaining informed consent, and measures for maintaining confidentiality 7 , 8 .

Monitoring and compliance

IRB also monitors ongoing research projects to ensure compliance with ethical standards. They may require periodic reports and can conduct audits to ensure ongoing adherence to ethical principles 7 , 8 .

Handling ethical violations

In cases where ethical standards are breached, IRB has the authority to impose sanctions, which can range from requiring modifications to the study to completely halting the research project 7 , 8 .

Other agencies and boards enforcing standards

Beyond IRB, there are other regulatory bodies and agencies at national and international levels that enforce ethical standards in research. These include:

The Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) in the United States, which oversees compliance with the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects.

The World Health Organization (WHO) , which provides international ethical guidelines for biomedical research.

The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) , which sets ethical standards for the publication of biomedical research.

These organizations, along with IRB, form a comprehensive network that ensures the ethical conduct of scientific research. They safeguard the integrity of research using the reflections and lesson learnt from the past.

Benefits of ethical research

Credible and reliable outcomes, why is credibility so crucial in research, and how do ethical practices contribute to it.

Ethical practices such as rigorous peer review, transparent methodology, and adherence to established protocols ensure that research findings are reliable and valid 9 . When studies are conducted ethically, they are less likely to be marred by biases, fabrications, or errors that could compromise credibility. For instance, ethical standards demand accurate data reporting and full disclosure of any potential conflicts of interest 9 , which directly contribute to the integrity and trustworthiness of research findings.

How do ethical practices lead to socially beneficial outcomes?

Ethical research practices often align with broader societal values and needs, leading to outcomes that are not only scientifically significant but also socially beneficial. By respecting principles like justice and beneficence, researchers ensure that their work with human subjects contributes positively to society 7 , 8 . For example, ethical guidelines in medical research emphasize the need to balance scientific advancement with patient welfare, ensuring that new treatments are both effective and safe. This balance is crucial in addressing pressing societal health concerns while safeguarding individual rights and well-being.

Trust between the public and the scientific community

The relationship between the public and the scientific community is heavily reliant on trust, which is fostered through consistent ethical conduct in research. When the public perceives that researchers are committed to ethical standards, it reinforces their confidence in the scientific process and its outcomes. Ethical research practices demonstrate a respect for societal norms and values, reinforcing the perception that science serves the public good.

Case studies

Case study 1: the development and approval of covid-19 vaccines.

The development and approval of COVID-19 vaccines within a short time is a testament to how adherence to ethical research practices can achieve credible and beneficial outcomes. Strict adherence to ethical guidelines, even in the face of a global emergency, ensured that the vaccines were developed swiftly. However, safety standards were compromised to some extent as no animal trials were done before humans. The vaccine development was not transparent to the public, and this fuelled the anti-vaccination crowd in some regions. Ethical compliance, including rigorous testing and transparent reporting, should expedite scientific innovation while maintaining public trust.

Case study 2: The CRISPR babies

What ethical concerns were raised by the creation of the crispr babies, and what were the consequences.

The creation of the first genetically edited babies using CRISPR technology in China raised significant ethical concerns 10 . The lack of transparency, inadequate consent process, and potential risks to the children can be likened to ethical misconduct in genetic engineering research. This case resulted in widespread condemnation from the scientific community and the public, as well as international regulatory frameworks and guidelines for genetic editing research 10 .

Recommendation and conclusion

Continuous education and training.

The scientific community should prioritize ongoing education and training in ethics for researchers at all levels, ensuring awareness and understanding of ethical standards and their importance.

Enhanced dialogue and collaboration

Encourage multidisciplinary collaborations and dialogues between scientists, ethicists, policymakers, and the public to address emerging ethical challenges and develop adaptive guidelines.

Fostering a culture of ethical responsibility

Institutions and researchers should cultivate an environment where ethical considerations are integral to the research process, encouraging transparency, accountability, and social responsibility.

Global standards and cooperation

Work toward establishing and harmonizing international ethical standards and regulatory frameworks, particularly in areas like genetic engineering and AI, where the implications of research are global.

Ethics approval

Ethics approval was not required for this editorial.

Informed consent was not required for this editorial

Sources of funding

No funding was received for this research.

Author contribution

G.D.M. wrote this paper.

Conflicts of interest disclosure

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Research registration unique identifying number (UIN)

Goshen David Miteu.

Data availability statement

Provenance and peer review.

Not commissioned, externally peer-reviewed.

Sponsorships or competing interests that may be relevant to content are disclosed at the end of this article.

Published online 21 March 2024