Research Ethics in Sociology

The planning and conducting of research that will aid in the advancement of any behavioral or social science requires the choice of a research paradigm that appropriately balances the researcher's ability to control the research setting while maintaining an adequate and accurate representation of the complexity of the real world situation. When working with human subjects, the researcher is further required to take into account various ethical considerations to ensure that no physical or psychological harm occurs to the subjects as well as that the data are as valid as possible. For this purpose, professional codes of ethics have been developed to guide researchers in the ethical conduct of experiments and studies. In particular, researchers need to guarantee as much as possible the confidentiality of subjects' private information, acquire informed consent from research participants, and take all precautions possible during research planning, implementation, and dissemination to adequately and accurately present their research findings.

The conduct of the scientific research, by which sociology and other behavioral and social sciences advances, can be both challenging and rewarding. The antecedents of human behavior that we see all around us are complicated and interrelated, requiring the creative application of the scientific method in order to gather data to better understand and predict human behavior. There are a number of research tools available to social and behavioral scientists which supports this task. As shown in Figure 1, these research paradigms offer scientists various degrees of control over the research situation and the degree to which the research situation realistically reflects the complexity of the real world.

Laboratory Experiments

Laboratory experiments allow researchers the most control not only over the level of the independent variable that is experienced by the subjects, but also over the various extraneous variables that can erroneously affect the outcome of the study. For example, if one wanted to determine the relationship between how an individual dresses at work and how that person is treated by others, one might set up a simple laboratory experiment in which pictures of individuals in various types of attire (e.g., dark business suit, business casual, casual) are presented to subjects who are then asked to rate the professionalism of the person in the picture. This approach to collecting data to test the research hypothesis gives the researcher a great deal of control over the experimental situation (e.g., how the people in the picture are dressed). However, rating the "professionalism" of people portrayed in photographs is far removed from real world settings, so the results would not be widely applicable. If the researcher is willing to give up some control over the experimental variables, s/he would be able to design an experimental condition with more realism.

Simulations

A simulation could be set up in which subjects interact with experimental confederates who dress in various types of attire as specified by the experimenter. This research paradigm still offers the researcher a great deal of control over the experimental situation (e.g., she can specify exactly how the confederates will dress), but its increased realism concomitantly gives the researcher less control (e.g., extraneous variables such as the way the confederates talk, their attitude, and other variables not related to the research hypothesis can affect the response of the subjects). Further, although a simulation is more realistic than a laboratory experiment, it still only remotely emulates the real world situation.

Field Experiments

Giving up a little more control in favor of a higher degree of realism, the researcher could conduct a field experiment in which confederates interacted with the subjects in a real-world business setting. However, this situation would allow for the greater possibility of the influence of extraneous variables than the more controlled simulation and laboratory experimental paradigms. In some respects, this can be both an advantage and disadvantage. Although one's attire in the workplace has been shown to affect the way that one is treated, the way one is treated also depends on many other variables as well (e.g., behavior, grooming, attitudes of the other person, competence). The complexity of these variables can be better seen in field settings than in more controlled paradigms.

Real world situations tend to be very complex, however, particularly when one is trying to determine what variables affect human behavior. In many cases, it would be virtually impossible for a researcher to sufficiently articulate all the real world variables that influence behavior in a way that would allow a hypothesis to be empirically tested using inferential statistics. Statistical tools are available for modeling real-world behavior, but these typically require the collection of vast amounts of data from real-world observation. For such tasks or for the purposes of collecting individual observations for the application of inductive reasoning, more realistic research paradigms are needed. For example, although a researcher might be able to use a more controlled research paradigm to collect data on various levels of the dependent variable (e.g., business attire, business casual, and casual dress), in truth there are virtually infinite combinations of the ways that people can dress at work. Is a dark suit more impressive than light suit? If so, does the suit need to be black, or would dark gray or navy blue be just as impressive? Does the suit need to be plain or do pinstripes add to the professional aura? The list of permutations on just this one level of attire is seemingly endless. Similarly, how does one best define the way that a person is "treated at work"? Once again, in the real world there are seemingly endless ways in which this can be defined ranging from the politeness or friendliness with which they are treated by peers, supervisors, and customers to the hard data of number and frequency of promotions, amount and frequency of raises and bonuses, scores on performance appraisals, just to name a few measures.

Field Studies

Field studies are examinations of how people behave in the real world. For example, a researcher might either directly or unobtrusively observe how various people are treated in the workplace, recording his/her observations both on the treatment received as well as the person's attire. Another approach would be to employ the paradigm of survey research. Subjects could be interviewed by a member of the research team or asked to fill out a questionnaire regarding the way that they typically dress at work and how they perceive the treatment they receive from peers, supervisors, and customers. This could be combined with other information such as the amount and frequency of raises, bonuses, or promotions.

Survey Research

Theoretically, survey research allows researchers to gather the most information about the situation under investigation. However, although a very thorough interview or survey instrument can be written that would hypothetically gather all the data needed for the researcher to make decisions about the antecedents of treatment in the workplace, such instruments are often more lengthy than the potential research subject's attention span. Further, as opposed to the other research techniques, surveys and interviews are not based on observation. Therefore, there is no way to know whether or not the information being gathered from the subject is true. As a result, information gathered from research paradigms more to the right of the continuum in Figure 1 tend to be difficult to empirically test and determine the validity of the underlying hypothesis. So, the behavioral researcher is left with a dilemma.

The Middle Road

At first glance, it might seem that the best research paradigms lie somewhere in the middle of the continuum shown in Figure 1. Paradigms in the middle of the continuum still allow the researcher a good deal of control over the experimental situation while allowing for more widely applicable results due to the increased realism of the research situation. This tempting rule of thumb, however, is weakened by the fact that the ultimate goal of most researchers is to do research that adequately and accurately reflects the real world situation (i.e., is highly realistic) so that it can be extrapolated and used in predictions. It also allows a great deal of control over the variables so that the results can be statistically analyzed and the probabilities of the accuracy of the hypothesis can be estimated. However, the complexity of real world behavior places obvious limitations on the degree to which this can be accomplished. Further, when dealing with human subjects, there is another set of limitations that restrict the degree to which variables can be eliminated: Research ethics.

Research Ethics

In scientific research, the term ethics refers to a code of moral conduct regarding the treatment of research subjects that is subscribed to by the members of a professional community. Many professional groups had a specific written code of ethics that sets standards and principles for professional conduct and the treatment of research subjects. When dealing with human subjects, the researcher obviously wants first to do no harm, either physically or psychologically. However, the manipulation of variables often brings with it the potential for harming the subject. Further, research ethics are not relevant only to controlled experiments. Often, merely asking the question such as is done in survey research can bring up bad memories and unresolved psychological difficulties that can be harmful to the subject (e.g., questions about personal experiences in childhood or spousal abuse).

Applications

The American Sociological Association (ASA) has developed a code of ethics and policies and procedures for the professional and ethical conduct of research with humans. The general guiding principles stress "professional competence, integrity, professional and scientific responsibility, respect for people's rights, dignity, and diversity, and social responsibility." Three specific sections of the code of ethics deal with the specific ethical responsibilities of researchers performing sociological research: confidentiality, informed consent, and research planning, implementation, and dissemination.

Confidentiality

Frequently, the information collected by sociologists is sensitive in nature, particularly when that information can be traced back to the individual who provided it. Most people are loath to reveal personal information about themselves, their attitudes and feelings, or their family situation if they think there is a possibility of that information being made public and associated with them specifically. Virtually every person has personal information that s/he prefers to keep private for any number of reasons. Sometimes, this is a personal preference. Often, however, an individual's desire for confidentiality of personal information stems from a fear of harm should that information become public. Further, from a research point of view, it is important to maintain confidentiality in order to help ensure that the information obtained from research subjects is complete and accurate. Otherwise, it is quite likely that the data obtained will be tainted due to the very understandable desire on the part of the research subject to keep private information private or even to lie in order to appear better.

To this end, it is essential that sociologists and other behavioral and social science researchers take all reasonable precautions necessary in order to ensure the confidentiality of all subjects and organizations participating in their research studies. According to ASA guidelines, this confidentiality extends even after the death of the participant. This responsibility applies not only to the primary researcher, but to all members of the research team who have access to confidential information whether that information was collected as part of the current research study or involves the analysis of confidential information previously collected in other settings.

There are a number of ways that confidentiality of data can be ensured in many cases. One frequently used method for ensuring confidentiality is to remove any demographic data that specifically links confidential information to a particular individual from the database. For example, a researcher might not include the names of individuals or their specific addresses in the database. Instead, a unique identification number could be used to link all the data for a particular individual so that it could be analyzed without being traceable back to that individual.

However, in some situations, it is not possible to ensure confidentiality in this manner. In such situations, the researcher needs to discuss the relative limitations of confidentiality and foreseeable uses of the confidential information with the participants in the study. In such situations, it is also important for the researchers to take reasonable precautions to determine that they have obtained the informed consent of identifiable individuals before they transfer data to others or review the data collected by others. The twenty-first century has brought with it new technological means for storing and transferring data. From the perspective of confidentiality, this has both advantages and disadvantages. Researchers need to exercise extreme caution when transferring confidential data over public communication networks as well as maintaining the confidentiality of any audio or video recording by which a research subject may be identified.

Informed Consent

Another important ethical principle for researchers investigating human behavior is the concept of informed consent. Informed consent is an agreement between a participant and researcher or practitioner that discloses the nature of the procedure, its potential benefits, possible risks, and alternatives of the experimental or therapeutic procedure. An informed consent document is voluntarily signed by the participant before the conduct of the research or therapy. As a general principle, sociologists should never involve a human subject in research without his/her informed consent.

In some cases, researchers may not be ethically required to obtain informed consent (e.g., cases when there is minimal risk for the research participants or when the acquisition of informed consent would prevent the research from being carried out). Further, sociologists can "ethically conduct research in public places or use publicly available information" without first obtaining informed consent (ASA, 1999). If, however, the situation is questionable, the sociologist or researcher should consult with the research review board at his/her institution or another authoritative group that has expertise on research ethics. Obtaining informed consent is particularly important when working with vulnerable individuals such as children or juveniles, recent immigrants, the mentally disabled, or the mentally ill. When working with such populations, it is vital that the researcher take all reasonable precautions to ensure that participation in the research study is done consensually and is not coerced.

Informed consent documents need to be crafted using "language that is both understandable and respectful to the research subjects or the legal representatives" (ASA, 1999). Informed consent documents should reveal the nature of the research, the fact that participation or continued participation is voluntary, possible risks, benefits, while there are significant factors that may influence the subject's willingness to participate, as well as how confidential information will be handled. It is important that signed consent documents be kept on file.

Sometimes, however, the nature of the scientific inquiry requires the use of deception when dealing with the subjects (e.g., in situations where knowledge of the true intent of the research might affect the subject's response). Deception should not be used unless its use is justified by the potential value of the study and unless all equally valid alternative methods are available have been considered. Further, before using deceptive methods in research, the researchers should submit the research assigned for approval to the appropriate institutional research review board or other authoritative research group. Researchers should not deceive potential subjects with regard to factors that might negatively impact their willingness to participate in the study (e.g., physical risks, discomfort, negative emotional experiences). When it is necessary to use deception as part of the experimental design, the researchers should debrief the subjects as soon as possible after the end of the study and correct any misconceptions on the part of the subjects at that time.

Research Planning, Implementation, & Dissemination

The purpose of sociological research is to advance the state of the art in understanding and predicting human behavior in social groups. In order for research to accomplish this task, researchers need to rigorously apply the principles and procedures of the scientific method in the design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation of the study and its results. During the planning phase, this means the researchers design the study so that the results will be unambiguous and not misleading. When dealing with special populations (e.g., children, individuals with developmental disabilities), researchers should consult with experts in other areas of expertise as necessary to better understand how to ethically deal with the potential subjects. Although from time to time it may be appropriate to offer a financial token or other inducement to potential research subjects, this should only be done where necessary and only to the extent that will encourage participation, but not introduce the possibility of changing the results (e.g., inducing false results to "please" the researcher who paid the subject).

When reporting the results of their research studies, it is essential that researchers only report the actual results of the study and not use or report fabricated data or falsified results. Further, it is important that all results of a research study be reported, including any information or results that may contradict the expected outcomes of the hypothesis or other findings in the study. To better help others interpret the results of their study, researchers should disseminate relevant caveats on the results and conclusions of their research. Extraneous variables and potential factors that may have influenced the results in either the current research situation or that might affect the ability to replicate the results in other studies should be fully discussed. Any assumptions, theories, methods, measures, and research designs should be fully disclosed. To aid in the advancement of the state-of-the-art, researchers should also permit other professionals to examine their data and analysis as long as the confidentiality of the subjects is maintained. Finally, if the researcher later finds significant errors in their presentation, analysis, or interpretation of the research data, s/he should take all reasonable steps to correct these errors such as publishing a correction, retraction, errata, or through other appropriate communication (ASA, 1999).

Conclusion

It is through the application of the scientific method and the conduct of scientific research that the state-of-the-art in sociology or any other behavioral or social science advances. When working with human subjects, the researcher needs to find a research paradigm with the appropriate balance between allowing control of the research variables and one that adequately and accurately reflects the reality of the real world and all its myriad details. This complex decision is further complicated by the fact that researchers using human subjects in their studies must also adhere to professional codes of ethics for the conduct of human research. If this is not done, not only can the data become tainted, but research subjects may be physically or psychologically harmed as a result of the experimental intervention. In particular, the American Sociological Association has articulated guidelines for the ethical conduct of research through confidentiality, informed consent, and precautions to be taken during research planning, implementation, and dissemination. By adhering to this code of ethics and by taking all reasonable steps to ensure the ethical treatment of research subjects, sociologists can help ensure that they not only do no harm to their subjects ,but also that they collect data that will aid in the advancement of their science.

Terms & Concepts

Confederate: A person who assists a researcher by pretending to be part of the experimental situation while actually only playing a rehearsed part meant to stimulate a response from the research subject.

Demographic Data: Statistical information about a given subset of the human population such as persons living in a particular area, shopping at an area mall, or subscribing to a local newspaper. Demographic data might include such information as age, gender, or income distribution.

Ethics: In scientific research, a code of moral conduct regarding the treatment of research subjects that is subscribed to by the members of a professional community. Many professional groups had a specific written code of ethics that sets standards and principles for professional conduct and the treatment of research subjects.

Experiment: A situation under the control of a researcher in which an experimental condition (independent variable) is manipulated and the effect on the experimental subject (dependent variable) is measured. Most experiments are designed using the principles of the scientific method and are statistically analyzed to determine whether or not the results are statistically significant.

Hypothesis: An empirically testable declaration that certain variables and their corresponding measure are related in a specific way proposed by a theory.

Inductive Reasoning: A type of logical reasoning in which inferences and general principles are drawn from specific observations or cases. Inductive reasoning is a foundation of the scientific method and enables the development of testable hypotheses from particular facts and observations.

Informed Consent: An agreement between a participant and researcher or practitioner that discloses the nature of the procedure, its potential benefits, possible risks, and alternatives of the experimental or therapeutic procedure. The informed consent document is voluntarily signed by the participant before the conduct of the research or therapy.

Model: A representation of a situation, system, or subsystem. Conceptual models are mental images that describe the situation or system. Mathematical or computer models are mathematical representations of the system or situation being studied.

Scientific Method: General procedures, guidelines, assumptions, and attitudes required for the organized and systematic collection, analysis, interpretation, and verification of data that can be verified and reproduced. The goal of the scientific method is to articulate or modify the laws and principles of a science. Steps in the scientific method include problem definition based on observation and review of the literature, formulation of a testable hypothesis, selection of a research design, data collection and analysis, extrapolation of conclusions, and development of ideas for further research in the area.

Subject: A participant in a research study or experiment whose responses are observed, recorded, and analyzed.

Survey: (a) A data collection instrument used to acquire information on the opinions, attitudes, or reactions of people; (b) a research study in which members of a selected sample are asked questions concerning their opinions, attitudes, or reactions, gathered using a survey instrument or questionnaire for purposes of scientific analysis; typically the results of this analysis are used to extrapolate the findings from the sample to the underlying population; (c) to conduct a survey on a sample.

Survey Research: A type of research in which data about the opinions, attitudes, or reactions of the members of a sample are gathered using a survey instrument. The phases of survey research are goal setting, planning, implementation, evaluation, and feedback. As opposed to experimental research, survey research does not allow for the manipulation of an independent variable.

Variable: An object in a research study that can have more than one value. Independent variables are stimuli that are manipulated in order to determine their effect on the dependent variables (response). Extraneous variables are variables that affect the response, but that are not related to the question under investigation in the study.

Bibliography

American Sociological Association. (1999). Code of ethics and policies and procedures of the ASA Committee on Professional Ethics. Washington, DC: American Sociological Association.

Shaw, R. (2011). The ethical risks of curtailing emotion in social science research: The case of organ transfer. Health Sociology Review, 20(1), 58-69. Retrieved November 6, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=60728650 Spicker, P. (2011). Ethical covert research. Sociology, 45(1), 118-133. Retrieved November 6, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=58014070

Swauger, M. (2011). Afterword: The ethics of risk, power, and representation. Qualitative Sociology, 34(3), 497502. Retrieved November 6, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=63995198

Suggested Reading

American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Retrieved April 15, 2008, from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code2002.html

Bridges, D. (2007). Research ethics, academic virtue and the practice of higher education. Social Sciences, 56(2), 7-13. Retrieved April 15, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=25975088&site=ehost-live

Cordner, A., & Brown, P. (2013). Moments of uncertainty: Ethical considerations and emerging contaminants. Sociological Forum, 28(3), 469-494. Retrieved November 6, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=89888318

Rivera, R., Borasky, D., Rice, R., Carayon, F., & Wong, E. (2007). Informed consent: An international researchers' perspective. American Journal of Public Health, 97(1), 25-30. Retrieved April 15, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=23660822&site=ehost-live

Spicker, P. (2007). Research without consent. Social Research Update, (51), 1-4. Retrieved April 15, 2008, from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=28139181&site=ehost-live

Wilkinson, S., & Kitzinger, C. (2013). Representing our own experience: Issues in "insider" research. Psychology Of Women Quarterly, 37(2), 251-255. Retrieved November 6, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database SocINDEX with Full Text. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=87656771