Special precautions may be taken when comprehension is very limited, for example due to a mental or immature disability (e.g. B infants and young children or children with mental disabilities). Participants should be able to choose, as far as possible, whether or not they wish to participate in the research. This situation also requires permission from other parties in order to protect participants from damages and defend their best interests. Commissioners must accept that researchers have the right to discuss their mandates in research reports, for example. B emphasize that perspectives, interpretations or considerations of obvious professional or practical relevance have been removed from the mandate. Requirements for sources and valid argumentation are particularly important when research may have consequences for the reputation or integrity of individuals or groups or where it may influence policy decisions. In such cases, it is particularly important for researchers to discuss alternative interpretations of their findings or to draw attention to scientific uncertainties. Where the results are used selectively or tendentiously by a representative, the applicant is required to report this and to require the correcting of the misleading presentation. These acts would be considered unethical by most scientists and some might even be illegal in some cases.
Most of them would also be in violation of different professional codes or institutional guidelines. However, they do not fall within the narrow category of acts that the government considers to be misconduct in research. In fact, there has been considerable debate about the definition of “misconduct in research” and many researchers and policymakers are not satisfied with the government`s narrow definition, which focuses on FFP. However, given the huge list of potential offences that may fall under the category of “other serious deviations” and the practical problems associated with defining and monitoring these other exemptions, it is understandable that government officials have decided to limit their concentration. Most professional organizations of researchers have established and published formal codes of conduct describing what constitutes acceptable and unacceptable professional behaviour of their member researchers. For example, the Code of Conduct of the Information Systems Association (AIS), the global professional association of researchers in the field of information systems, is summarized in Table 16.1 (the full code of conduct is available online under home.aisnet.org/ displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=15). Similar codes of ethics also exist for other disciplines. What is the view of the different aspects of your research on the six ethical principles defined in the esrc framework for research studies? Click on the image below to find out….