Conducting Research with Human Participants in an Ethical Fashion

Defining Ethics

 Ethical conduct implies that one has to carry out activities appropriately. Human research entails conducting research that touches on the lives of people. The main aim of conducting research is to better the lives of people. Human research might involve high risks hence there is a high possibility that things might go wrong (Harriss, & Atkinson, 2015). In spite of one's intentions, planning, and care, sometimes the research might do more harm than good. Thus, research conduct should incorporate values such as self-respect, self-sufficiency, and discretion. These ethical considerations normally translate into intricate regulatory systems that enable researchers to protect the lives of the human participants. Most of the time, research that uses human participants, is carried out for the sole purpose of methodically gathering and evaluating data from where the researchers can draw out conclusive evidence.

 Before carrying out research where humans are participants, a researcher has to physically and psychologically reduce the risks involved. Also, the researcher has to assure the human participants are fully aware of the dangers. Whenever a human participant comes into contact with a dangerous research aspect, the researcher must minimize the risk so that no extreme harm can be done to the human participant (Madary, & Metzinger, 2016). Also, obtaining informed consent from the participants is necessary. Informed consent pertains to revealing the research aim, research duration, and another research category. Also, the anticipated dangers are to be made clear and distinct to the human participants. Also, confidential protocols tied to the research are to be recorded as follows- in case something goes wrong, the human participants are to be compensated heavily, human participants have a right to walk away from the research.

Potential Harm to Participants

 The first thing that researchers should do whenever harm comes to the human participants is respecting human dignity. Human dignity forces the researchers to safeguard and prioritize their participants’ independence while at the same time ensuring that each human participant is fully aware of the danger involved in the research. Autonomy means that human participants can make decisions without coercion from researchers. To guarantee that there is autonomy, human participants should have access to the self-determination aspects of the research (Navalta, Stone, & Lyons, 2019). In other words, human participants have a right to agree or disagree with the researchers. Simply put, nothing should be forced on human participants, they should take part in the research according to their free will and in the end, make up more than one side of the story that is conjoined with the findings of the research.

Measures the Researcher Can Take To Reduce Risk

 Risk assessment is to be carried out before the human participants engage in the research. Risks assessment is perceived as the lens via which the researcher can forestall the research impact. Therefore, how the researchers manage risks is intensely affected by the social and political environment. For instance, in each activity, the researcher needs to perform a risk assessment to determine the amount of risk involved in that particular activity.  Similarly, the human participants have to be informed of the potential involved in each activity and ways of minimizing the potential risk involved in certain activities (Ko, Latoza, & Burnett, 2015). This way, one has a better chance of coming to terms with the research and its effects on the human participants. Also, some risks can occur as a result of negligence from the human participants themselves. In case human participants are responsible for the dangers, the researchers have a right to legal protection. Both the researchers and human participants have a role to play in the prevention of harm. Hence the roles should be designate accordingly for the sake of reducing risks involved in the research.

Informed Consent

 Informed consent is a mechanism that allows the researcher to educate the human participant on the risks and remunerations of taking part in the research. Human participants should be competent enough to make a conscious and voluntary choice on whether to take part in the research or avoid it completely. Informed consent is legal and ethical hence most researchers have to do everything in their power to ensure that all the things are done according to legal jurisdictions (Kosinski et al., 2015). Implied as a way of evaluating a human participant’s comprehension, informed consent requires the researcher to offer recommendations and document the entire process. Informed consent is somehow more accurate than other mechanisms and gives the researcher to right to refuse or accept taking part in the research. For example, the research has to inform the participants on the nature of the research, the advantages and disadvantages of taking part in the research, and recommended options. Also, the researcher is to assess the human participant's understanding of the entire situation. Moreover, the entire process must be documented for the sake of protecting the interests of the human participants. The researcher should protect the people's rights and choices.

 

 

References

Harriss, D. J., & Atkinson, G. (2015). Ethical standards in sport and exercise science research: 2016 update. International journal of sports medicine, 36(14), 1121-1124.

Madary, M., & Metzinger, T. K. (2016). Real virtuality: a code of ethical conduct. Recommendations for good scientific practice and the consumers of VR-technology. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 3, 3.

Navalta, J. W., Stone, W. J., & Lyons, S. (2019). Ethical issues relating to scientific discovery in exercise science. International Journal of Exercise Science, 12(1), 1.

Ko, A. J., Latoza, T. D., & Burnett, M. M. (2015). A practical guide to controlled experiments of software engineering tools with human participants. Empirical Software Engineering, 20(1), 110-141.

Kosinski, M., Matz, S. C., Gosling, S. D., Popov, V., & Stillwell, D. (2015). Facebook as a research tool for the social sciences: Opportunities, challenges, ethical considerations, and practical guidelines. American Psychologist, 70(6), 543.