Abstract
Although the origin of professional codes of ethics can be traced back to ancient Greece, their peak was in the late twentieth century with more than 70% of codes of ethics being created after 1990. Today professional ethical standards are formulated as codes of ethics, sets of principles or guidelines, declarations, conventions, charters, or laws, and they differ in scope, form, and content. As there is no consensus on what is meant by “research ethics” and “research integrity,” both concepts are clarified here.
Codes of ethics for scientists are often written in reaction to misconduct cases. However, the sudden boom in codes of ethics is also related to growing pressures upon scientists and the conflicting duties they face. Solutions to the issue of vast number of codes and guidelines – creating a few universal general codes for research or harmonization of existing documents – are also both problematic. A universal code makes sacrifices on the level of content to gain acceptance internationally, and differences in values will continue to pose ethical dilemmas and conflict.
The main obstacles and solutions in order to make codes of ethics work better are highlighted. It is argued that the process of drafting codes of ethics should be inclusive. To engage people real-life cases should be discussed for clarifying implicit values. Implementation requires skills or moral discussion and substantiation of positions. Codes of ethics, the shared understanding of values should be sought within professions. Declared and actual values should be in coherence both in the leadership of the organization and organizational culture.
References
All European Academies (ALLEA) (2011) The European code of conduct for research integrity. European Science Foundation, Strasbourg, pp 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1037/e648332011-002
American Council on Science and Health (2017) The Brussels declaration – ethics and principles for science and society. http://www.euroscientist.com/wpcontent/uploads/2017/02/Brussels-Declaration.pdf
American Psychological Association (APA) (2017) Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC
Anderson MS, Shaw MA, Steneck NH et al (2013) Research integrity and misconduct in the academic profession. In: Higher education: handbook of theory and research. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 217–261. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5836-0_5
Banks SJ (2015) From research integrity to researcher integrity: issues of conduct, competence and commitment. Acad Soc Sci Br Sociol Assoc Event Virtue Ethics Pract Rev Soc Sci Res:1–12. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4497.9040
Barker RL (1988) Just whose code of ethics should the independent practitioner follow? J Indep Soc Work 2:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1300/J283v02n04_01
Bayles MD (1988) The professional-client relationship. In: Callahan JC (ed) Ethical issues in professional life. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 113–120
Beauchamp TL, Childress JF (2009) Principles of biomedical ethics. Oxford University Press, New York. https://doi.org/10.3138/physio.61.3.154
Benedek TG (2014) “Case Neisser”: experimental design, the beginnings of immunology, and informed consent. Perspect Biol Med 57:249–267. https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2014.0018
Beyerstein D (1993) The functions and limitations of professional codes of ethics. In: Winkler ER, Coombs JR (eds) Applied ethics: a reader. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 416–421
Blake V, Joffe S, Kodish E (2011) Harmonization of ethics policies in pediatric research. J Law Med Ethics 39:70–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720X.2011.00551.x
Bonn NA, Godecharle S, Dierickx K (2017) European universities’ guidance on research integrity and misconduct: accessibility, approaches, and content. Res Integr Res Misconduct 12:33–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264616688980
Braxton JM (2010) Norms and the work of colleges and universities: introduction to the special issue – norms in academia. J High Educ 81:243–250
Bretag T, Mahmud S, Wallace M et al (2011) Core elements of exemplary academic integrity policy in Australian higher education. Int J Educ Integr 7:3–12. https://doi.org/10.21913/IJEI.v7i2.759
Brief AP, Dukerich JM, Brown PR, Brett JF (1996) What’ s wrong with the treadway commission report? Experimental analyses of the effects of personal on values and codes of conduct fraudulent financial reporting. J Bus Ethics 15:183–198. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00705586
British Educational Research Association (BERA) (2018) Ethical guidelines for educational research, 4th edn. British Educational Research Association, London
Carlson RV, Boyd KM, Webb DJ (2004) The revision of the declaration of Helsinki: past, present and future. Br J Clin Pharmacol 57:695–713. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2004.02103.x
Centre for Ethics; University of Tartu (2017) Estonian code of conduct for research integrity. https://www.eetika.ee/en/estonian-code-conduct-research-integrity
Cox D, La Caze M, Levine MP (2003) Integrity and the fragile self. Ashgate, Aldershot
Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science (2014) Danish code of conduct for research integrity. https://ufm.dk/en/publications/2014/the-danish-code-ofconduct-for-research-integrity
Davies SR (2018) An ethics of the system: talking to scientists about research integrity. Sci Eng Ethics 25:1235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0064-y
Davis M (1991) Thinking like an engineer: the place of a code of ethics in the practice of a profession. Philos Public Aff 20:150–167
de Lange DW, Guidet B, Andersen FH et al (2019) Huge variation in obtaining ethical permission for a non-interventional observational study in Europe. BMC Med Ethics 20:1–7
Dienhart J (1995) Rationality, ethical codes, and an egalitarian justification of ethical expertise: implications for professions and organizations. Bus Ethics Q 5:419–450. https://doi.org/10.2307/3857392
Dobson J (2005) Monkey business: a neo-Darwinist approach to ethics codes. Financ Anal J 61(3):59–64. https://doi.org/10.2469/faj.v61.n3.2728
Doppelfeld E (2007) Harmonization of research ethics committees – are there limits? Japan Med Assoc J 50:493–494
Drenth PJD (2010) Research integrity: protecting science, society and individuals. Eur Rev 18:417–426. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1062798710000104
Emanuel EJ, Wendler D, Grady C (2008) An ethical framework for biomedical research. In: Emanuel EJ, Grady C, Crouch RA, Lie RK, Miller FG, Wendler D (eds) The Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 123–135
Evers K (2003) Codes of conduct. Standards for ethics in research. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. https://doi.org/10.7589/0090-3558-39.4.904
Fieldsend D (2011) Unity in diversity: can there ever be a true European consensus in bioethics? Hum Reprod Genet Ethics 17:222–234. https://doi.org/10.1558/hrge.v17i2.222
Fjellstrom R (2005) Respect for persons, respect for integrity. Med Health Care Philos 8:231–242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-004-7694-3
Forsberg E-M, Anthun FO, Bailey S et al (2018) Working with research integrity – guidance for research performing organisations: the Bonn PRINTEGER statement. Sci Eng Ethics 24:1023–1034. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-018-0034-4
Franzen M, Rödder S, Weingart P (2007) Fraud: causes and culprits as perceived by science and the media. EMBO Rep 8:3. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.embor.7400884
Fuster GG, Gutwirth S (2016) Promoting integrity as an integral dimension of excellence in research. D II.4 Legal analysis. https://printeger.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/D2.4.pdf. https://doi.org/10.15420/ecr.2016.11.2.123
Gowans CW (1987) Moral dilemmas. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Greve HR, Palmer D, Pozner JE (2010) Organizations gone wild: the causes, processes and consequences of organizational misconduct. Acad Manag Ann 4:53–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416521003654186
Guillén M, Melé D, Murphy P (2002) European vs. American approaches to institutionalisation of business ethics: the Spanish case. Bus Ethics A Eur Rev 11:167–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8608.00273
Hakulinen T, Arbyn M, Brewster DH et al (2011) Harmonization may be counterproductive – at least for parts of Europe where public health research operates effectively. Eur J Pub Health 21:686–687. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckr149
Hassan S, Wright BE, Yuki G (2014) Does ethical leadership matter in government? Effects on organizational commitment, absenteeism, and willingness to report ethical problems. Public Adm Rev 74:333–343. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12216
Iphofen R (2009) Ethical decision making in social research: a practical guide. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke
Israel M, Hay I (2006) Research ethics for social scientists. SAGE, London
Jordan SR (2013) Conceptual clarification and the task of improving research on academic ethics. J Acad Ethics 11:243–256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-013-9190-y
Kaiser M (2014) The integrity of science – lost in translation? Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 28:339–347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpg.2014.03.003
Kaptein M, Schwartz MS (2008) The effectiveness of business codes: a critical examination of existing studies and the development of an integrated research model. J Bus Ethics 77:111–127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9305-0
Kidd D (1996) The international conference on harmonization of pharmaceutical regulations the European medicines evaluation agency, and the FDA: who’s zooming who? Indiana J Glob Leg Stud 4:183–206
Kitchener KS, Kitchener RF (2009) Social science research ethics. In: Mertens DM, Ginsberg PE (eds) The handbook of social research ethics. SAGE, Los Angeles, pp 5–23
Kjonstad B, Willmott H (1995) Business ethics: restrictive or empowering? J Bus Ethics 14:445–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00872086
Knoppers BM (2014) International ethics harmonization and the global alliance for genomics and health. Genome Med 6:13. https://doi.org/10.1186/gm530
Komić D, Marušić SL, Marušić A (2015) Research integrity and research ethics in professional codes of ethics: survey of terminology used by professional organizations across research disciplines. PLoS One 10:e0133662. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0133662
Ladd J (1991) The quest for a code of professional ethics: an intellectual and moral confusion. In: Deborah GJ (ed) Ethical issues in engineering. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, pp 130–136
Lee JJ (2005) What is past is prologue: the international conference on harmonization and lessons learned from European drug regulations harmonization. Univ Pennsylvania J Int Econ Law 26:151–191
Levine FJ, Skedsvold PR (2008) Behavioral and social science research. In: Emanuel EJ, Grady C, Crouch RA, Lie RK, Miller FG, Wendler D (eds) The Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 336–355. https://doi.org/10.2500/aap.2008.29.3122
Li R, Barnes M, Aldinger CE, Bierer BE (2015) Global clinical trials: ethics, harmonization and commitments to transparency. Harv Public Heal Rev 5:1–7
Luegenbiehl HC (1991) Codes of ethics and the moral education of engineers. In: Deborah GJ (ed) Ethical issues in engineering. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Macfarlane B (2009) Researching with integrity: the ethics of academic inquiry. Routledge, New York/London
Mahmud S, Bretag T (2014) Fostering integrity in postgraduate research: an evidence-based policy and support framework. Account Res 21:122–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2014.847668
Marchant GE, Sylvester DJ, Abbott KW, Danforth TL (2009) International harmonization of regulation of nanomedicine. Stud Ethics Law Technol 3:Article 6
Marres N (2007) The issues deserve more credit: pragmatist contributions to the study of public involvement in controversy. Soc Stud Sci 37:759–780. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312706077367
Mason HE (1996) Moral dilemmas and moral theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Mayer T, Steneck N (2007) Final report to ESF and ORI. First world conference on research integrity: fostering responsible research, pp 1–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4949.2007.00144.x
Mcfall L (1987) Integrity. Ethics 98:5–20. https://doi.org/10.1086/292912
McGonigle I, Shomron N (2016) Privacy, anonymity and subjectivity in genomic research. Genet Res (Camb) 98:10–12. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016672315000221
Meriste H, Parder M-L, Lõuk K et al (2016) Normative analysis of research integrity and misconduct. https://printeger.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/D2.3.pdf
Molzon JA, Giaquinto A, Lindstrom L et al (2011) The value and benefits of the international conference on harmonisation to drug regulatory authorities: advancing harmonization for better public health. Clin Pharmacol Ther 89:503–512. https://doi.org/10.1038/clpt.2011.10
Morin K (2005) Code of ethics for bioethicists: medicine’s lessons worth heeding. Am J Bioeth 5:59–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265160500245501
National Academy of Sciences (2002) Integrity in scientific research. National Academies Press, Washington, DC
National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine (2009) On being a scientist: a guide to responsible conduct in research, 3rd edn. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. https://doi.org/10.17226/12192
Neves M d CP (2018) On (scientific) integrity: conceptual clarification. Med Health Care Philos 21:181–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-017-9796-8
OeAWI (2016) OeAWI guidelines for good scientific practice. https://www.cdg.ac.at/fileadmin/main/documents/Sonstige_Dokumente/160418_OeAWI_Richtlinien_Broschuere_DE_EN.pdf
Office of the Secretary, United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (1979) The Belmont report: ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research. Office of the Secretary, United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research
Orr RD, Pang N, Pellegrino ED, Siegler M (1997) Use of the Hippocratic oath: a review of twentieth century practice and a content analysis of oaths administered in medical schools in the US and Canada in 1993. J Clin Ethics 8:377–388
Painter-Morland M (2010) Questioning corporate codes of ethics. Bus Ethics 19:265–279. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8608.2010.01591.x
Papademas D (2009) IVSA code of research ethics and guidelines. Vis Stud 24:250–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/14725860903309187
Parder M-L, Juurik M (2019) Reporting on existing codes and guidelines. Pro-Res D1.1, Tartu, European Commission: PRO-RES - PROmoting integrity in the use of RESearch results. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3560777
Parry J (2017) Developing standards for research practice: some issues for consideration. In: Iphofen R (ed) Finding common ground: consensus in research ethics across the social sciences. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, pp 77–101
Pipes RB, Holstein JE, Aguirre MG (2005) Examining the personal-professional distinction 8 ethics codes and the difficulty of drawing a boundary. Am Psychol 60:325–334. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.4.325
Pritchard MS (2006) Professional integrity: thinking ethically. University Press of Kansas, Lawrence
Resnik DB (1998) The ethics of science: an introduction. Routledge, London. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8519.00123
Resnik DB (2009) International standards for research integrity: an idea whose time has come? Account Res 16:218–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989620903065350
Resnik DB, Rasmussen LM, Kissling GE (2015) An international study of research misconduct policies. Account Res 22:249–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2014.958218
Russel WMS, Burch RL (1959) The principles of humane experimental technique. Methuen, London
Ruyter KW (2003) Forskningsetikk: Beskyttelse av enkeltpersoner og samfunn. Gyldendal akademisk, Oslo
Sarauw LL, Degn L, Ørberg JW (2019) Researcher development through doctoral training in research integrity. Int J Acad Dev 24:178–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2019.1595626
Schaubroeck JM, Hannah ST, Avolio BJ et al (2012) Embedding ethical leadership within and across organization levels. Acad Manag J 55:1053–1078. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0064
Schein EH (2010) Organizational culture and leadership. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2010.518579
Schwitzgebel E (2009) Do ethicists steal more books? Philos Psychol 22:711–725. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515080903409952
Shamoo AE, Resnik DB (2015) Responsible conduct of research, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, New York
Sims RR, Brinkmann J (2003) Enron ethics (or: culture matters more than codes). J Bus 45:243–256
Singapore Statement on Research Integrity (2010) Singapore Statement on Research Integrity. https://doi.org/10.3768/rtipress.2018.pb.0018.1806
Spielthenner G (2015) Why comply with a code of ethics? Med Health Care Philos 18:195–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-014-9594-5
Starr WC (1983) Codes of ethics towards a rule-utilitarian justification. J Bus Ethics 2:99–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00381700
Sutrop M (2016) Kuidas panna eetikakoodeksid paremini toimima. In: Sutrop M (ed) Eetikakoodeksid. Väärtused, normid ja eetilised dilemmad. Eesti Keele Sihtasutus, Tartu, pp 85–103
Townend D (2018) Conclusion: harmonisation in genomic and health data sharing for research : an impossible dream? Hum Genet 137:657–664. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-018-1924-x
UNESCO (2015) Universal declaration on bioethics and human rights. UNESCO, Paris
UNESCO (2017) Recommendation on science and scientific researchers; 2018. UNESCO, Paris, pp 1–2
Unger S (1991) Codes of engineering ethics. In: Johnson DG (ed) Ethical issues in engineering. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02536578
Urushihara H, Parmenter L, Tashiro S et al (2017) Bridge the gap: the need for harmonized regulatory and ethical standards for postmarketing observational studies. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 26:1299–1306. https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.4269
Werhane P, Doering J (2007) Conflicts of interest and conflicts of commitment. In: Elliot D, Stern JD (eds) Researcher ethics: a reader. University Press of New England, London, pp 165–189
World Medical Association (2013) World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 310:2191–2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053
Wulf K (2011) From codes of conduct to ethics and compliance programs. Recent developments in the United States. Logos Verlag, Berlin
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Additional information
The ideas expressed in this chapter have been supported by the Centre of Excellence in Estonian Studies (European Union, European Regional Development Fund) and are related to research projects IUT20-5 (Estonian Ministry of Education and Research) and support for sectoral R&D – RITA, action 4 – study “Developing Estonian National System for Monitoring and Supporting Ethics in Scientific Research.” This work has also profited from research done in the European Commission financed H2020 projects PRINTEGER and PRO-RES. Ilmar Anvelt and Tiina Kirss helped with English expression.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Sutrop, M., Parder, ML., Juurik, M. (2020). Research Ethics Codes and Guidelines. In: Iphofen, R. (eds) Handbook of Research Ethics and Scientific Integrity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76040-7_2-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76040-7_2-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-76040-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-76040-7
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities