Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conceptualising Ethical Issues in the Conduct of Research: Results from a Critical and Systematic Literature Review

  • Published:
Journal of Academic Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract  

This article concerns  the ways in which authors from various fields conceptualise the ethical issues arising in the conduct of research. We reviewed critically and systematically the literature concerning the ethics of conducting research in order to engage in a reflection about the vocabulary and conceptual categories used in the publications reviewed. To understand better how the ethical issues involved in conducting research are conceptualised in the publications reviewed, we 1) established an inventory of the conceptualisations reviewed, and 2) we critically assessed them. We found that the publications reviewed mostly showed examples of descriptive ethics, in that most authors describe ethical issues without reflecting much on them, which could be explained both by 1) a lack of ethical education in research contexts, and 2) by the fact that we do not know what researchers know (or do not) about ethical issues. Additionally, the definitions identified in the publications are scarce and at times imprecise, but this seems more to point out the ethical vocabulary’s difficulties in certain contexts. Further, very few authors offer proper conceptualisations of the ethical issues arising in conducting research. When dealing with vast arrays of ethical issues to conceptualise, perhaps one ought to remember that some typologies already exist that could guide further reflection and help understand other realities for which the current ethical vocabulary may be lacking. We believe that combining the reviewed typologies, both with other well-developed typologies and critical reflection, could help support better ethical practice in conducting research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References 

  • Aarsand, P. (2016). Children’s media practises: challenges and dilemmas for the qualitative researcher. Journal of Children and Media, 10(1), 90–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, S., Pillay, R., & Smith, B. (2018). A systematic review of the experiences of vulnerable people participating in research on sensitive topics. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 88, 85–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Hidabi, M. D. A. (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, vol. 886) (pp. 511‒526). New York: Springer.

  • Bahn, S. (2012). Keeping Academic Field Researchers Safe: Ethical Safeguards. Journal of Academic Ethics, 10, 83–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balk, D. E. (1995). Bereavement Research Using Control Groups: Ethical Obligations and Questions. Death Studies, 19, 123–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banister, S. (2007). Ethical Issues and Qualitative Methods in the 21st Century: How Can Digital Technologies Be Embraced in the Research Community? Journal of Ethnographic and Qualitative Research, 1, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2012). The Principles of Biomedical Ethics (7th ed.), New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Birchley, G., Huxtable, R., Murtagh, M., ter Meulen, R., Flach, P., & Gooberman-Hill, R. (2017). Smart homes, private homes? An empirical study of technology researchers’ perceptions of ethical issues in developing smart-home health technologies. BMC Medical Ethics, 18(23), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouffard, C. (2000). Le développement des pratiques de la génétique médicale et la construction des normes bioéthiques. Anthropologie et Sociétés, 24(2), 73–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boutin-Ganache, I. (2007). Plaidoyer pour un élargissement des pratiques de l’éthique de la recherche. Les ateliers de l’éthique, 2(2), 52–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruhn, J. G., Zajac, G., Al-Kazemi, A. A., & Prescott Jr., L. D. (2002). Moral Positions and Academic Conduct. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(4), 461–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, J. (2007). Interview with Judith Butler Gender Trouble: Still Revolutionary or Obsolete? http://www.fahamu.org/mbbc/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/BangBang2007InterviewwithJudithButler.pdf. Accessed 05 July 2020.

  • Colnerud, G. (2015). Ethical dilemmas in research in relation to ethical review: An empirical study. Research Ethics, 10(4), 238–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conseil de recherches en sciences humaines (CRSH), Conseil de recherches en sciences naturelles et en génie du Canada (CRSNG), Instituts de recherche en santé du Canada (IRSC). (2018). Énoncé de politique des trois Conseils : Éthique de la recherche avec des êtres humains (EPTC2). Retrieved from https://ethics.gc.ca/fra/documents/tcps2-2018-fr-interactive-final.pdf. Accessed 06 July 2020.

  • Côté, J. (2012). Les enjeux éthiques de l’utilisation d’internet en recherche: principales questions et pistes de solutions. Éthique publique, 14(2), 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davison, J. (2004). Dilemmas in Research: Issues of Vulnerability and Disempowerment for the Social Workers/Researcher. Journal of Social Work Practice, 18(3), 379–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Villers, M. É. (2009). Multi-dictionnaire de la langue française. (5th ed.). Québec Amérique.

    Google Scholar 

  • Degavre, F., & Saussey, M. (2014). La fabrique des chercheur-e-s mise à l’épreuve des normes globales d’éthique. Journal des anthropologues, 136–137.

  • Donagan, A. (1977). The Theory of Morality. . University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Drolet, M. J., & Girard, K. (2020). Les enjeux éthiques de la recherche en ergothérapie: un portrait préoccupant. Revue canadienne de bioéthique, 3(3), 21–40.

  • Drolet, M. J. (2014). De l’éthique à l’ergothérapie : La philosophie au service de la pratique ergothérapique. (2nd ed.). Presses de l’Université du Québec.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eide, P., & Kahn, D. (2008). Ethical Issues in the Qualitative Researcher-Participant Relationship. Nursing Ethics, 15(2), 199–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engelhardt, H. T. (1988). Foreword. In V. R. Potter (Ed.), Global Bioethics: Building on the Leopold Legacy (pp. vii‒xii). Michigan. Michigan State University Press.

  • Erzinçlioglu, Z. (1999). British Universities: An Ethical Dilemma. Contemporary Review, 143–147.

  • Fraser, D. M. (1997). Ethical dilemmas and practical problems for the practitioner researcher. Educational Action Research, 5(1), 161–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fulford, K. W. M. (2004). Facts/Values: Ten Principles of Values-Based Medicine. In J. Radden (Ed.), The Philosophy of Psychiatry: A Companion. (pp. 205–234). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giorgini, V., Mecca, J. T., Gibson, C., Medeiros, K., Mumford, M. D., Connelly, S., et al. (2016). Researcher Perceptions of Ethical Guidelines and Codes of Conduct. Accountability in Research, 22(3), 123–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodrich, K. M., & Luke, M. (2017). Ethical Issues in the Research of Group Work. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 42(1), 108–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goulet, M., & Drolet, M. J. (2018). Les enjeux éthiques en réadaptation. Un état des lieux de la conceptualisation de notions éthiques. Canadian Journal of Bioethics, 1(3), 9–21.

  • Grinyer, A. (2001). Ethical Dilemmas in Nonclinical Health Research from a UK Perspective. Nursing Ethics, 8(2), 123–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansson, S. O. (2017). The Ethics of Doing Ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23, 102–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, M., Johnson, N. F., & Auld, G. (2013). Silences of ethical practice: dilemmas for researchers using social media. Educational Research and Evaluation, 19(6), 546–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holian, R., & Coghlan, D. (2013). Ethical Issues and Role Duality in Insider Action Research: Challenges for Action Research Degree Programmes. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 26(16), 399–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Honderich, T. (Ed.). (2005). The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, R. F., Gough, A., O’Kane, N., McKeown, G., Fitzpatrick, A., Walker, T., et al. (2018). Ethical Issues in Social Media Research for Public Health. AJPH Law & Ethics, 108(3), 343–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jameton, A. (1984). Nursing Practice: The Ethical Issues. Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, K. (2017). Dilemmas in International Research and the Value of Practical Wisdom. Developing World Bioethics, 17(1), 50–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, M. M., & El-adaway, I. H. (2012). Ethical Issues in Multiple-Authored and Mentor-Supervised Publications. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education & Practice, 37–47.

  • Kellehear, A. (1998). Ethical Issues for the Qualitative Researcher: Some Critical Reflections. Annual Review of Health Social Science, 8(1), 14–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimmelman, J. (2005). Medical Research, Risk, and Bystanders. IRB Ethics & Human Research, 27(4), 1–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laplante, B. (2005). Cheminement éthique d’un chercheur engagé en recherche collaborative. Revue des sciences de l’éducation, 31(2), 417–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, T. W., & Mitchell, T. R. (2011). Working in Research Teams: Lessons from Personal Experiences. Management and Organization Review, 7(3), 461–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Les Fonds de recherche du Québec (FRQ). (2014). Politique sur la conduite responsable en recherche. Retrieved from http://www.frqs.gouv.qc.ca/documents/10191/186005/Politique+sur+la+CRR_FRQ_2014.pdf/4e383bf5-95f6-45c2-be65-08879f8788a1. Accessed 06 July 2020.

  • Lierville, A. L., Grou, C., & Pelletier, J. F. (2015). Enjeux éthiques potentiels liés aux partenariats patients en psychiatrie: état de situation à l’institut universitaire en santé mentale de Montréal. Santé mentale au Québec, 40, 119–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, T., Alcorn, N., & O’Neill, J. (2013). Ethical issues in collaborative action research. Educational Action Research, 21(1), 107–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lomas Scott, C., & Foncesca, L. (2010). Overstepping the mark: ethics procedures, risky research and education researchers. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 33(3), 287–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynöe, N., Sandlund, M., & Jacobsons, L. (1999). Research ethics committees: a comparative study of assessment of ethical dilemmas. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 2, 152–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madhan, M., Kimidi, S. S., Gunasekaran, S., & Arunachalam, S. (2017). Should Indian researchers pay to get their work published? Current Science, 112(4), 703–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, T. (2018). Moral Dilemmas. In E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2018/entries/moral-dilemmas/. Accessed 5 July 2020.

  • McCullough, L. B., Coverdale, J. H., & Chervenak, F. A. (2007). Constructing a Systematic Review for Argument-Based Clinical Ethics Literature: The Example of Concealed Medications. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 32(1), 65–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCullough, L. B., Coverdale, J. H., & Chervenak, F. A. (2004). Argument-based Medical Ethics: A Formal Tool for Critically Appraising the Normative Medical Ethics Literature. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 191(4), 1097–1102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merritt, M. (2005). Moral Conflict in Clinical Trials. Ethics, 115, 306–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, C. W. (2005). “Ideal Theory” as Ideology. Hypatia, 20(3), 165–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mish, F. C. (Ed.). (2014). Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. (11th ed.). Merriam-Webster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molyneux, S., Tsofa, B., Barasa, E., Nyikuri, M. M., Waweru, E. W., Goodman, C., et al. (2016). Research Involving Health Providers and Managers: Ethical Issues Faced by Researchers Conducting Diverse Health Policy and Systems Research in Kenya. Developing World Bioethics, 16(3), 168–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mondain, N., & Arzouma Bologo, É. (2009). L’intentionnalité du chercheur dans ses pratiques de production de connaissances : les enjeux soulevés par la construction des données en démographie et santé en Afrique. Cahiers de recherche sociologique, 48, 175–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morelle, M., & Ripoll, F. (2009). Les chercheur-es face aux injustices: l’enquête de terrain comme épreuve éthique. Annales de géographie, 1(665–666), 157–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mortari, L., & Harcourt, D. (2012). ‘Living’ ethical dilemmas for researchers when researching with children. International Journal of Early Years Education, 20(3), 234–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neves, T., Holligan, C., & Deuchar, R. (2018). Reflections concerning ethnographic ethical decisions and neo-liberal monitoring. Etnográfica, 22(2), 241–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Novelskaitė, A., Pučėtaitė, R., & Lipnevič, A. (2011). Defining Research Ethics Legally: Liaison between International and National Documents. The Case of Safety of the Researcher as a Research Ethics Issue. The International Journal of Science in Society, 2(3), 219–234.

  • Orb, A., Eisenhauer, L., & Wynaden, D. (2000). Ethics in Qualitative Research. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 33(1), 93–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parr, M. (2010). Solving ethical dilemmas with children: Empowering classroom research. McGill Journal of Education, 45(3), 451–462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, J. (1999). The Law of Peoples. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnik, D. B., & Elliott, K. C. (2016). The Ethical Challenges of Socially Responsible Science. Accountability in Research, 23(1), 31–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, W. D. (1930). The Right and the Good. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott-Jones, D. (1994). Ethical Issues in Reporting and Referring in Research with Low-Income Minority Children. Ethics & Behavior, 4(2), 97–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, L. L., Read, K., & Chen, D. T. (2013). Children Enrolled in Parents’ Research: A Uniquely Vulnerable Group in Need of Oversight and Protection. IRB Ethics & Human Research, 35(3), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sieber, J. E. (2004). Empirical Research on Research Ethics. Ethics & Behavior, 14(4), 397–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steneck, N. H. (2004). ORI Introduction to the Responsible Conduct of Research, U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Office of Research Integrity. Retrieved from https://ori.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/2018-04/rcrintro.pdf. Accessed 06 July 2020.

  • Swazey, J. P., Anderson, M. S., Seashore Lewis, K., & Seashore Louis, K. (1993). Ethical Problems in Academic Research. American Scientist, 81(6), 542–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swisher, L. L., Arslanian, L. E., & Davis, C. M. (2005). The Realm-Individual Process-Situation (RIPS) Model of Ethical Decision-Making. HPA Resource, 5(3), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tatebe, J. (2015). The Ethics of Difference: Ethical Dilemmas of External Researchers. Journal of Academic Ethics, 13, 229–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tessman, L. (2015). Moral Failure: On the Impossible Demands of Morality. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. (2003). Ethical challenges of informed consent in prehospital research. CJEM, 5(2), 108–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasamba, P. (2009). Fieldwork in a conflicted society: A contemporary researcher’s ethical dilemma. International Journal of African Renaissance Studies, 4(2), 193–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, J., & Fitzgerald, T. (2010). Researcher tales and research ethics: the spaces in which we find ourselves. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 33(3), 273–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams-Jones, B., Potvin, M. J., Mathieu, G., & Smith, E. (2013). Barriers to research on research ethics review and conflicts of interest. IRB: Ethics & Human Research, 35(5), 14–20.

  • Yee, W. C., & Andrews, J. (2006). Professional researcher or a ‘good guest’? Ethical dilemmas involved in researching children and families in the home setting. Educational Review, 58(4), 397–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yip, C., Reena Han, N. L., & Leong Sng, B. (2016). Legal and ethical issues in research. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia, 60(19), 684–688.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zgaga, P. (2018). Researchers and research ethics: Between fears of the expansion of controversial practices and the strengthening of ethical awareness. European Educational Research Journal, 1–13.

Further Reading

  • Borchard, K. (2012). Ethics and Studying Homelessness: Tales from the Field. In A. Randall, & V. Trenna (Eds), Professional Lives, Personal Strugles: Ethics and Advocacy in Research on Homelessness (pp. 60–67). Lexington Books.

  • Chung, R. (2013). Théories idéale et non idéale. In J.-B. Jeangène Vilmer (Ed.), Éthique des relations internationales: Problématiques contemporaines (pp. 63‒92). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

  • Lourau, R. (1995). Chercheur surimpliqué. L’homme et la société, 115, 39–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGinn, R. (2013). Discernment and Denial: Nanotechnology Researchers’ Recognition of Ethical Responsibilities Related to Their Work. NanoEthics, 7, 93–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mesny, A., & Marcoux, J. S. (2009). La recherche en gestion et les comités d’éthique : l’épreuve de la pratique. Cahiers de recherche sociologique, 48, 111–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyazaki, A. D., & Taylor, K. A. (2008). Researcher Interaction Biases and Business Ethics Research: Respondent Reactions to Researcher Characteristics. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(4), 779–795.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nickels, S., & Knotsch, C. (2011). Inuit perspectives on research ethics: The work of Inuit Nipingit. Études/Inuit/Studies, 35(1–2), 57–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poole, H., Giles, D. C., & Moore, K. (2004). Researching sexuality and sexual issues: implications for the researcher? Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 19(1), 79–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savage, S. L. (2016). Ethics and the Academy: Researchers on the Edge. Studies in Art Education, 67(4), 375–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sigmon, S. T. (1995). Ethical Practices and Beliefs of Psychopathology Researchers. Ethics & Behavior, 5(4), 295–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simmons, J. A. (2010). Ideal and Nonideal Theory. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 38(1), 5–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valentini, L. (2012). Ideal vs. Non-Ideal Theory: A Conceptual Map. Philosophy Compass, 7(9), 654–64.

  • Vogel, L. (2017). Researchers may be part of the problem in predatory publishing. CMAJ, 189(42), E1324–E1325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors warmly thank Guy Trépanier, Librarian affiliated with the Department of Philosophy and Arts at the Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, for his invaluable help in choosing the appropriate keywords to use in the databases. Marie-Josée Drolet and Bryn Williams-Jones were supported by a SSHRC grant to conduct this research.

Funding

SSHRC provided a grant to conduct this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières (UQTR), Trois-Rivières, Canada

    Élie Beauchemin & Louis Pierre Côté

  2. Department of Occupational Therapy, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières (UQTR), Trois-Rivières, Canada

    Marie-Josée Drolet

  3. Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Canada

    Bryn Williams-Jones

Authors
  1. Élie Beauchemin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Louis Pierre Côté
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marie-Josée Drolet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Bryn Williams-Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marie-Josée Drolet.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of Interest

None to declare.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Beauchemin, É., Côté, L.P., Drolet, MJ. et al. Conceptualising Ethical Issues in the Conduct of Research: Results from a Critical and Systematic Literature Review. J Acad Ethics 20, 335–358 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-021-09411-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-021-09411-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation