Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

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.

Https

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.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023;21(2):269-292.
doi: 10.1007/s10805-022-09455-3. Epub 2022 Aug 12.

Ethical Issues in Research: Perceptions of Researchers, Research Ethics Board Members and Research Ethics Experts

Marie-Josée Drolet  1 , Eugénie Rose-Derouin  2 , Julie-Claude Leblanc  2 , Mélanie Ruest  2 , Bryn Williams-Jones  3
Affiliations
Review

Ethical Issues in Research: Perceptions of Researchers, Research Ethics Board Members and Research Ethics Experts

Marie-Josée Drolet et al. J Acad Ethics. 2023.

Abstract

In the context of academic research, a diversity of ethical issues, conditioned by the different roles of members within these institutions, arise. Previous studies on this topic addressed mainly the perceptions of researchers. However, to our knowledge, no studies have explored the transversal ethical issues from a wider spectrum, including other members of academic institutions as the research ethics board (REB) members, and the research ethics experts. The present study used a descriptive phenomenological approach to document the ethical issues experienced by a heterogeneous group of Canadian researchers, REB members, and research ethics experts. Data collection involved socio-demographic questionnaires and individual semi-structured interviews. Following the triangulation of different perspectives (researchers, REB members and ethics experts), emerging ethical issues were synthesized in ten units of meaning: (1) research integrity, (2) conflicts of interest, (3) respect for research participants, (4) lack of supervision and power imbalances, (5) individualism and performance, (6) inadequate ethical guidance, (7) social injustices, (8) distributive injustices, (9) epistemic injustices, and (10) ethical distress. This study highlighted several problematic elements that can support the identification of future solutions to resolve transversal ethical issues in research that affect the heterogeneous members of the academic community.

Keywords: Ethical issues; Injustices; Research Ethics Board Members; Research Ethics experts; Researchers.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests and FundingAs noted in the Acknowledgements, this research was supported financially by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Ethical issues in research according to the participants
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Al-Hidabi, Abdulmalek, M. D., & The, P. L. (2018). Multiple Publications: The Main Reason for the Retraction of Papers in Computer Science. In K. Arai, S. Kapoor, & R. Bhatia (eds), Future of Information and Communication Conference (FICC): Advances in Information and Communication, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (AISC), Springer, vol. 886, pp. 511–526
    1. Allaire, S., & Deschenaux, F. (2022). Récits de professeurs d’université à mi-carrière. Si c’était à refaire…. Presses de l’Université du Québec
    1. Aristotle . Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 2012.
    1. Bahn S. Keeping Academic Field Researchers Safe: Ethical Safeguards. Journal of Academic Ethics. 2012;10:83–91. doi: 10.1007/s10805-012-9159-2. - DOI
    1. Balk DE. Bereavement Research Using Control Groups: Ethical Obligations and Questions. Death Studies. 1995;19:123–138. doi: 10.1080/07481189508252720. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources