Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications Chapter Three Ethics: What Are My Responsibilities as a Researcher?

Key Concepts Communication research could harm participants. Classic ethical positions provide bases for decisions about treating participants. Codes of practice provide practical guidelines about treating participants. Formal review is often required where research on humans is proposed. Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

For Discussion Would you... ▫Show participants offensive materials? ▫Deliberately deceive participants? ▫Accept funding from a source that wants your research to help sell its products? ▫Start false rumors? ▫Record people’s behavior without them being aware of it? Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

Some Classic Ethical Positions Judeo-Christian - “Do unto others.” Kant – categorical imperative – A behavior is valid if you are willing to accept it as a universal rule. Bentham, Mill – utilitarianism – Greatest good for the greatest number. Rawls – “Veil of Ignorance” – Dispassionate; review all sides of decision equally. Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

The Purpose of Ethics Codes The primary purpose of ethics codes in human communication research is to protect research participants. Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

Key Points of Ethics Codes Do no harm. Informed consent. Voluntary participation. Participants can leave at any time. Debriefing after the study. Anonymity or confidentiality. Crediting other researchers. Full reporting. Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

Nuremberg & Helsinki Codes Nuremberg Code (1948) – ▫Participants must consent to research. ▫Research benefits must outweigh risks. Declaration of Helsinki (1964) – ▫Review by independent committee. ▫Informed consent. ▫Research by qualified individuals. ▫Research benefits should exceed risks. Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

The Belmont Report (1979) Respect for Persons ▫Information. ▫Comprehension. ▫Voluntariness. Beneficence ▫Maximize benefits / minimize harm. Justice ▫Fair procedures and outcomes in selecting research subjects. Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

Peer Review Basic Assumption: Those best equipped to evaluate your work and its impact on human participants are appropriately qualified people doing similar work to your own. Formal Review:  Institutional Review Boards, editorial process. Informal Review:  Networking, conferences. Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

Institutional Review Board IRB A formal review mechanism established to review research proposals for their impact on human participants. Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

Relationships of Participants to Researchers. Subject Respondent Informant Participant Collaborator Partner Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

Ethics of the Literature Review How far back in time to review. Use of secondary sources (summary articles) versus primary (original) sources. Reporting research that does not support your viewpoint. Reporting research that is proprietary (“owned”). Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

Ethical Issues in Reporting Research Honesty. Plagiarism. Confidentiality or anonymity. Crediting others. Appropriate language. Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

The Internet and Research Ethics Advantages Rapid access to large numbers of research participants. Low cost. Disadvantages Conceptual problems defining the Internet. Practical problems of sampling, obtaining consents & establishing authenticity of participants Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

The Internet Research Ethics Dilemma Human participants are being studied. Consent of participants is therefore required. versus The web is published content. Internet research is content analysis. Consent of participants is therefore not required. Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

Guidelines for Internet Research The more vulnerable the participants, the greater the researcher’s obligation to protect them. The more public the venue, the less obligation there may be to protect individual privacy, confidentiality, & right to informed consent. Adopted from the Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR) Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

Chapter Summary Research Ethics... Focus on how research participants should be treated. Basic concern is protecting participants from harm. Review mechanisms include IRBs and informal peer review. Formal ethics codes include “Nuremberg”, “Helsinki”, the Belmont Report and the “Common Rule”. Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

Vocabulary Review confederates unobtrusive measures confidentiality anonymity debriefing consent forms literature review. proprietary information Judaeo-Christian ethic categorical imperative principle of utilitarianism Veil of Ignorance plagiarism Nuremberg Code Declaration of Helsinki Belmont Report informed consent institutional review board (IRB) peer review Common Rule Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

Vocabulary Review Anonymity Autonomy Belmont Report Beneficence Categorical imperative Common Rule Confederate Confidentiality Control/control group Debriefing Declaration of Helsinki Informed consent Institutional review board/IRB Judeo-Christian ethic Justice Nuremberg Code Principle of utilitarianism Proprietary information Unobtrusive measures Veil of ignorance Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications

Web Resources The National Institutes of Health Bioethics Resources - American Psychological Association - American Association for Public Opinion Research - Introducing Communication Research 2e © 2014 SAGE Publications