Ethical Considerations in Human Subjects Research

Author(s):  
Tyron C. Hoover ◽  
Aman Buzdar
ILAR Journal ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela N Hvitved

Abstract The significance of ethical considerations for animal research policy has long been acknowledged, but the role of philosophical ethics in the policymaking process has been less clear. By comparing the ethical framework of animal research policy with that for human subjects research, this article considers how the legacies of these two policy areas influence current policy and suggests that ethicists and ethical scholarship have been underutilized in developing animal research policy. An important aspect of policymaking is gathering and responding to input provided by various stakeholders. Given their expertise in a highly relevant area, ethicists should be considered key stakeholders in animal research policy deliberations. This article explores the role of ethicists and ethical scholarship in influencing animal research policy and suggests that a more robust engagement with the professional ethics community throughout the deliberative process is vital for policymakers to adequately account for ethical considerations.


2014 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Manton ◽  
Lisa A. Wolf ◽  
Kathy M. Baker ◽  
Margaret J. Carman ◽  
Paul R. Clark ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clair Morrissey ◽  
Myka Yamasaki ◽  
Carmel Levitan

Increasingly, behavioral scientists rely on crowdsourcing platforms (e.g., Amazon’s MTurk) to collect large datasets rapidly and inexpensively. However, by heightening the distance between participants and researchers, these platforms render the participants “invisible,” and thereby raise ethical concerns related to participant autonomy. Moreover, because many participants use these platforms to earn a living, researchers must consider issues of fair compensation, and the relationship between employment and research participation. We present an overview of ethical considerations raised by the invisibility of crowdsourced research participants, including recommendations for researchers to consider in deciding whether and how to utilize these platforms. Specifically, we recommend that researchers: explore alternatives that distinguish research from employment; strengthen participant-research communication, including by recognizing and utilizing participant expertise in study design; and, explore alternatives that do not require “payment,” or, barring that, determine and pay appropriate compensation. We conclude by locating these ethical considerations in the context of broader calls for more thoughtful data collection.


Author(s):  
Elizabeth Lerner Papautsky ◽  
Richard J. Holden ◽  
Rupa S. Valdez ◽  
Jordan Hill ◽  
Janetta Brown

In the 4th panel on the topic of The Patient in Patient Safety, we highlighted topics of current relevance and facilitated a reflection session. The objective was to highlight the ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted patient ergonomics research and work, with particular focus on safety. After a topic overview, panelists presented their work on overcoming challenges to human subjects research created by the suspension of face-to-face activities during the COVID-19 pandemic. A facilitated reflection and brainstorming session using Miro followed. We used questions to elicit examples of patient and caregiver roles in safety during the pandemic and research strategies and challenges. These questions were also distributed on social media prior to the event. The panel served as an opportunity to share lessons learned.


2007 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 49-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane S. Lopus ◽  
Paul W. Grimes ◽  
William E. Becker ◽  
Rodney A. Pearson

This paper presents the results of a web-based survey of economic educators who were asked about their knowledge and experience with human subjects research and the mandated federal protocols that govern such research at most American universities. The results indicate that while economic education researchers are experienced in conducting human subjects research and are aware of the federal regulations, they are not well informed about key details of the regulations. They are skeptical of the net benefits of the mandated protocols because of the perceived discouraging burdens of the paperwork that rarely result in significant modifications of their research projects. The authors conclude that recent calls for modifications to the federal regulations for classroom-based research projects may be justified given the opportunity costs of adhering to the regulations compared to the relatively low levels of perceived benefits.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document